Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> And, perhaps, in a class of 100 people, why should everyone come out with the same laundry list?

I fully agree with this point. People here argue that minimum for scientist should be cut down to something that fits into strictly vocational degree that scores them a well paying job.

Every scientist in any STEM field I know knows "the minimum" that is larger than what fits into masters degree in their field. Someone with PhD is basically still scientist in training, a junior. 8-10 years of basics then very special knowledge above that sounds about right.

My background is in EE, so I think that being an engineer has prestige but it's not the same as being a scientist. Good EE engineer knows different things than research scientist in the field. You need to know enormous amount of theory and math to design modern circuits and radio interfaces but designing them is engineering.

Would the Scientist equivalent to EE be related? In a lot of fields the engineering and problem solving aspects are pretty removed from the science driving progress. Even then the term "scientist" just means someone using the scientific method to solve problems, and good engineers involved in research fit that description.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact