
Engineers Nine Times More Likely Than Expected to Become Terrorists - richardboegli
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/11/17/this-is-the-group-thats-surprisingly-prone-to-violent-extremism/
======
tikhonj
> _Survey data indicates that engineering faculty at universities are far more
> likely to be conservative than people with other degrees, and far more
> likely to be religious. They are seven times as likely to be both religious
> and conservative as social scientists._

This statement seems to say as much about the sort of people who _don 't get
non-engineering degrees_ as it does about engineers. In my experience, people
deep into humanities fields—especially the social fields like sociology,
anthropology and religious studies—are both significantly self-selected _and_
externally selected. Perhaps even more so than engineers especially in niche
fields. This selection has more of a moral, ideological and philosophical
component than that for engineering. Put together, there is quite a bit of
pressure _against_ people harboring radical religious views in most of the
humanities.

It's an interesting dynamic to think about.

I'm also a bit curious about what exactly an "administrative position in
Hamas" entails. My sketchy understanding is that Hamas functions as more of a
proto-government than merely a military organization: are they counting _any_
role in Hamas as terrorists?

------
kbart
I'd say bullshit. Most terrorists come from religious minorities/immigrants
that usually study engineering as it's more accessible than humanities/arts
etc. due to language and/or cultural barrier. That's all.

------
jamesrcole
If their explanation is correct then it has implications for how engineers
should be trained.

E.g. that it would be beneficial to provide a more well rounded education that
goes beyond the "engineering mindset" and exposes them to "messier" situations
and means to deal with those.

~~~
mikeash
Nine times a really small number is still a really small number.

A well rounded education may well be beneficial for engineers, but if so it's
not because of the terrorism potential.

~~~
jamesrcole
The number isn't itself the important thing, it's the consequences of their
actions on the world. I think we can agree that terrorism, and the world's
reaction to it, is a pretty big thing.

[EDIT, in response to the two replies I've received so far: I'm making a
pragmatic suggestion. In pragmatic terms what matters is whether the benefits,
whatever their size, outweigh the costs. I suspect they might, and even
incremental benefits are still benefits]

~~~
olau
I think it would be more effective to educate the mass media. Western-world
terrorist attacks work by playing on the dynamics of the mass media, and the
mass media is definitely playing along, licking up the clicks and views.

Pragmatically speaking, amortized, the deaths and injuries are minor compared
to other sources of death and injury (e.g. traffic).

~~~
jamesrcole
Why not do both?

------
userbinator
_They are seven times as likely to be both religious and conservative as
social scientists._

"X times as likely to be Y as Z" doesn't parse for me. Is this an Americanism,
and/or does it really mean "X times _more_ likely to be Y _than_ Z"?

------
iofj
Engineers are also a necessity for terrorist groupings. It may very well be
that engineers aren't any more likely to become terrorists, it's that the ones
that do are much more likely to find a terror cell that will take them, which
then leads to actual terror. As opposed to, you know, dreaming about it.

~~~
jamesrcole
The article covers this possibility, and argues that the evidence shows this
isn't the case.

(I am not stating my opinion, only pointing out what the article says - and
wondering whether you actually read it)

------
gohrt
Article is delightfully light on data or references that could shed light on
any of the one-line posited explanations for the measurement.

------
richardboegli
Gambetta and Hertog find strongly suggestive evidence that engineers are more
likely to become terrorists because of the way that they think about the
world.

From article

------
solipsism
_Survey data indicates that engineering faculty at universities are far more
likely to be conservative than people with other degrees, and far more likely
to be religious. They are seven times as likely to be both religious and
conservative as social scientists._

That's surprising to me. I'd like to know where they got that data, and look
more into it. How likely are they to be conservative and religious than people
with _no_ degrees?

~~~
CookieMon
> I'd like to know where they got that data

Yes, given that the context seems to be people who go into engineering in
Middle Eastern and North African countries which are too dysfunctional to
employ engineers, you are left wondering whether the survey data was of those
societies, or whether they extended some data to be an international truism.
But I'm not paying $30 to find out.

I too would have thought engineers less likely to be religious _in the west_
than people with no degrees, or humanities degrees.

~~~
nickff
From what I have seen of survey data in North American engineering magazines,
their readerships (at least those who fill out surveys) seem to be fairly
religious, as well as notably conservative and libertarian leaning. I have
seen this consistently across a few trade publications for electronic and
mechanical engineers, but do not have any citations handy at the moment of
this post.

~~~
CookieMon
> _fairly religious, as well as notably conservative and libertarian leaning_

These are words I would use to describe North America ;)

So you'd want to remove regional bias by comparing engineers to people from
the same demographic and region, i.e. not comparing liberal arts graduates in
California against the petroleum engineering graduates from Texas.

------
Hackernaut
Ask seymour papert and he will tell you,the education os will crash like
ussr,the infantilization of the minds of people that have passed through
school and easy crude oil money is the lifeblood of terrorism

------
meric
We are all on NSA's lists now.

------
richardboegli
Engineers are more likely to become terrorists because of mindset and lack of
opportunity

From article

------
andrewvijay
I already want to bomb the shit out of everyone who talks against javascript.

~~~
lightlyused
I think you mean "balm".

------
solipsism
When will the liberals stop mincing words and admit we're at war with Radical
Engineering?

~~~
solipsism
Didn't get the joke I guess?

------
pj_mukh
As an Engineer, I've been avoiding this conclusion for a while. Chalked it up
to faulty conclusions from liberal arts majors jealous of funding cuts or a
lack thereof (/s).

But this conversation is becoming more and more prevalent. Perhaps STEAM
education ([http://stemtosteam.org/](http://stemtosteam.org/)) and not a
purely focussed STEM education is the answer

~~~
nyolfen
>As an Engineer, I've been avoiding this conclusion for a while. Chalked it up
to faulty conclusions from liberal arts majors jealous of funding cuts or a
lack thereof (/s).

perhaps consider that your priorities may be divergent from other modes of
thinking, and that your priorities may not be universal

