Reminds me of the joke where a mathematician, an engineer and a physicist try to find a formula for prediction horse races: the mathematician proves that a solution exists, the engineer has a formula that works almost all the time but can’t really tell how he arrived at it and the physicist has a clean derivation for his formula, but it only applies to spherical horses in vacuum.

Then again we might have to distinguish between engineers in a researcher position (which I’d consider science with a focus on application) and engineers in “normal” work positions (from my experience, most non-R&D-engineer’s work compares more to the work of a mechanic or plumber than a scientist: Making things and ensuring that they work as intended).

Probably the answer depends on both your definition of “scientist” and of “engineer” (as in: what’s included and what isn’t in each group).

Cheers, Daniel

Cheers, Daniel H. ]]>