[ponderingHplus]

The term "engineer" is regulated in Canada, and only Professional Engineers (PE) awarded a licence by their provincial regulatory body can call themselves as such. Someone who graduates with an engineering degree is usually called an Engineer in Training (EIT), until they become a PE. The reason we regulate a specific word for our profession is because of our relationship with the public, and the ethical and safety promises engineers are regulated to commit to the them. The average person does not have the technical background to judge the proficiency of an engineer, so they must trust in their abilities and morals. In Canada, engineering is a self regulated profession designed to uphold high technical and ethical standards so that we can maintain that trust society gives us. The intention is, that when someone calls them self an engineer, you can have confidence in both their technical ability and moral obligations. To be effective, the standards of the term and definition of who can and can't use it needs to be regulated.

That being said, I normally refer to myself as a chemical engineer (not a chemical EIT). I think the distinction needs to be made when you're interacting with someone that you are offering your engineering services to. For example, when at work I would always sign my emails indicating that I was an EIT.

[Panini_Jones]

> The intention is, that when someone calls them self an engineer, you can have confidence in both their technical ability and moral obligations.

I thought the intention was that, even if someone didn't have confidence in both their technical ability and moral obligations, it didn't matter. An engineer is a person whose technical decisions are literally protected by law - if they decide to not sign off on something, they don't have to convince anyone and can't face consequences for it (ahem, Quebec bridge[1]). What you're suggesting is just a byproduct of confidence in the system.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_Bridge - Search for 'iron ring'

[ponderingHplus]

I'm not sure that I fully understand your comment, but what I mean to say is that the intent of regulating the specific word is so that everyone has the same understanding of what using that word entails, when applying it to the profession of engineering. What you say about an engineer's decisions being legally bound are true, but that helps provide confidence in the work engineers do, but isn't the reason for regulating a specific word. I feel like I might be missing something in your comment though, sorry if this doesn't address what you were getting at.