just a lone voice from the outside world but perhaps programmers could just call themselves programmers and stop trying to take on terms that already have meanings? it's surreal at first reading silicon valley discourse - you have to learn that when you guys say 'engineer' it doesn't mean an engineer. it means a programmer. Likewise I imagine a researcher who actually engages in research would be similarly lost trying to find you guys theorems etc. when you start calling yourselves researchers
I find this whole article so bizarre because it never contends with the definition of "engineer" that's always made the most intuitive sense to me, which is as the person label behind the practice half of the theory/practice dichotomy, with "scientist" representing the theory half.
This is obviously broad compared to the other definitions, but I've always liked how flexible it was. E.g. I have no real issues thinking of doctors and lawyers as engineers in this way. Doctors engineer solutions to bodily dysfunctions, and lawyers engineer solutions to their clients' problems with the law.
> Engineers, as practitioners of engineering, are professionals who invent, design, analyze, build and test machines, complex systems, structures, gadgets and materials to fulfill functional objectives and requirements while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, regulation, safety and cost.[1][2]
I think it's just kind of silly to try to title something based on the how, not the what. A painter paints, right? But what about all of the other jobs and roles that include painting? Are they painters?
Those that disagree with "Software engineers" being called "Engineers" are again propagating nonsense (my post that started this thread).
i actually agree with the extension to engineer to include software. however, many programmers do not do software engineering - any more than a construction worker does bridge engineering - yet they're casually 'engineers'