Thread: Pew Poll Re Political Affiliation of Scientists

I find this poll very interesting. I must say all the people I work with are what you North Americans class as "liberal".

Just from a purely definitional perspective, it would be worrying if scientists were generally Conservative, as they would never feel the need to investigate anything new!

And though I am loathe to wade into the PhD debate, my belief is that a PhD after your name simply says you have jumped through the hoops necessary for modern academia, and nothing more. It is a highly structured and quite political process in and of itself, and any relationship between "intelligence" (whatever that means) and obtaining a PhD is certainly not causal.

James.

I think if you talk to people who have been through the University system its a well known fact that Science majors are conservative and I don't mean in their fields but politically speaking and Engineering people are really politically conservative.

Originally Posted by billyjeff2

guess they're handing out PhD's to just about anyone these days...

not handing out... selling. if you have enough money, you can buy a phd. most schools are quite willing to sell.

you can also work very very hard for a very very long time.

no way to tell which, unless you know that person's history. I will say this: most of the engineers I know (with 5 year degrees) are much MUCH smarter (analysis, problem solving, critical thinking) than most of the doctoral candidates I know, unless the doctoral candidate is in a "hard science" like math or physics. a phd in history or sociology isn't very difficult, judging by some of my classmates at school.

but hey, that's just my experience, YMMV. I'm not conservative or liberal so I don't care, but it's important to point out that a phd doesn't necessarily mean you have any degree of intelligence.

Science majors especially Physics, Chem and Engineers are a totally different breed of cat than humanities or social science majors. Some of these science guys appear to be way more intelligent partly from stereotypes and partly because society seems to value that kind of knowledge. However people in these others areas often time have a different type of smarts which the science majors often times totally lack.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Science majors especially Physics, Chem and Engineers are a totally different breed of cat than humanities or social science majors. Some of these science guys appear to be way more intelligent partly from stereotypes and partly because society seems to value that kind of knowledge. However people in these others areas often time have a different type of smarts which the science majors often times totally lack.

There is also the brand of smarts known as good old horse sense. I have known my share of college graduates totally lacking in this most crucial type of intelligence.

Originally Posted by JMS

There is also the brand of smarts known as good old horse sense. I have known my share of college graduates totally lacking in this most crucial type of intelligence.

I've been doing biomedical basic research field for over 15 years and have worked with, trained, collaborated with etc. a ton of different scientists. Some do have excellent common "horse" sense, in fact the best ones always do. Others do not have good common sense. I think that the ones who took a stint outside of academia for a while and lived in the real world outside of school maybe have a bit more common sense than the others, but its really variable. So I think its hard to generalize about scientists, they are as varied as any other group of people.

Unfortunately a lot of people think of Jerry Lewis as a prototype of what a scientist is like. Laaaady, laaaaaady! Unfortunately, this nerd image (and perhaps having frog dissections as the traditional intro to science in grade school) has really turned off a great many American students who might have made great discoveries had they looked science as a career.

OK done with my rant, and my attempt to steer this thread further off topic.

Originally Posted by RazorPete

I've been doing biomedical basic research field for over 15 years and have worked with, trained, collaborated with etc. a ton of different scientists. Some do have excellent common "horse" sense, in fact the best ones always do. Others do not have good common sense. I think that the ones who took a stint outside of academia for a while and lived in the real world outside of school maybe have a bit more common sense than the others, but its really variable. So I think its hard to generalize about scientists, they are as varied as any other group of people.

Unfortunately a lot of people think of Jerry Lewis as a prototype of what a scientist is like. Laaaady, laaaaaady! Unfortunately, this nerd image (and perhaps having frog dissections as the traditional intro to science in grade school) has really turned off a great many American students who might have made great discoveries had they looked science as a career.

OK done with my rant, and my attempt to steer this thread further off topic.

When I would interview potential employees I found 3 basic types:
1) No college but all practical experience
2) no practical experience but has college degree
3)Practical experience and college degree
Generally speaking, of the 3 categories, I found no.#3 the best to hirer and no. #2 the worst to hirer.
This is of course a broad generalization.

I agree, for students, physicians as well as scientists that I evalute/hire, those who excel in school plus have valuable non-academic experience are generally the best candidates. I think the same is true for law and MBA programs who are also looking for that valuable outside of academic experience.