MIT probably counts as one of the "elites," Ivy or not. But I would say my experience there runs counter to a lot of the points in this article.
The diversity at MIT is not only geographical and racial, but also cultural, socioeconomic, sexual, and anything else you'd care to measure. The culture is not at all self-affirming; most students come in wondering how they got in and leave glad to have made it to a degree. Engineering's obviously well-respected, but it's clearly not a glamorous profession, so that chase for social status and immeasurable wealth is really downplayed since most good engineers won't get there. And MIT students say they went to school in Boston (rather than Cambridge) not out of noblesse oblige, but because lots of people think it's in Michigan.
I guess the "mind and hands" ethic grounds you a little.
> ... that chase for social status and immeasurable wealth is really downplayed since most good engineers won't get there
I think that this is an excellent observation, but I also think it's worth noting that many good engineers don't care if they get "there". If you're naturally inclined to find reward in problem-solving, then trained in how to solve progressively more complicated (and therefore rewarding) problems, the value comes from that activity, rather than in accumulating wealth.
Many engineers I've known are anything but "grounded," especially when it comes to their opinion of their own technical prowess, but that doesn't necessarily make them money-motivated.
that's a very good point. I posted earlier that I think the experience of going to Berkeley was very different from Harvard because it's a public, but some of the difference may be attributed to the culture of Engineering. I've met MIT and Stanford engineering grads, and I definitely don't get the same vibe I get from the Ivy-Lawyer types.
Comments
MIT probably counts as one of the "elites," Ivy or not. But I would say my experience there runs counter to a lot of the points in this article.
The diversity at MIT is not only geographical and racial, but also cultural, socioeconomic, sexual, and anything else you'd care to measure. The culture is not at all self-affirming; most students come in wondering how they got in and leave glad to have made it to a degree. Engineering's obviously well-respected, but it's clearly not a glamorous profession, so that chase for social status and immeasurable wealth is really downplayed since most good engineers won't get there. And MIT students say they went to school in Boston (rather than Cambridge) not out of noblesse oblige, but because lots of people think it's in Michigan.
I guess the "mind and hands" ethic grounds you a little.
> ... that chase for social status and immeasurable wealth is really downplayed since most good engineers won't get there
I think that this is an excellent observation, but I also think it's worth noting that many good engineers don't care if they get "there". If you're naturally inclined to find reward in problem-solving, then trained in how to solve progressively more complicated (and therefore rewarding) problems, the value comes from that activity, rather than in accumulating wealth.
Many engineers I've known are anything but "grounded," especially when it comes to their opinion of their own technical prowess, but that doesn't necessarily make them money-motivated.
that's a very good point. I posted earlier that I think the experience of going to Berkeley was very different from Harvard because it's a public, but some of the difference may be attributed to the culture of Engineering. I've met MIT and Stanford engineering grads, and I definitely don't get the same vibe I get from the Ivy-Lawyer types.