Why are there so many Engineers among Islamic Radicals? [pdf](orientemiedo.files.wordpress.com)
orientemiedo.files.wordpress.com
Why are there so many Engineers among Islamic Radicals? [pdf]
https://orientemiedo.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/diego-gambetta-steffen-hertog-why-are-there-so-many-engineers-among-islamic-radicals.pdf
16 comments
Yeah, there's so much wrong with this paper that it ceases to be wrong and just enters a realm of academic Dadaism. It's basically impossible to even formulate a working hypothesis without having a deep understanding of the socioeconomic drivers and effects around educational attainment and post-graduate alienation. The idea that engineers are inherently radicalizable runs counter to the academic thinking on the subject -- the article is provocative, sure, but extraordinary claims &c....
My pet theory is that INTJ males are prone to extremism. We see it here with this kind of pie-in-the-sky Libertarianism and other fringe views. Not sure why this is, I imagine having a disconnect from the social and emotional parts of life means that its easier to justify very strict and simplistic philosophies that miss out on many nuances. Often that comes with a mix of OCD and ADHD-like behaviors. When push comes to shove, these types may find it easier to justify violence. The amount of revolution talk on libertarian forums is evidence of this.
My own life has been a personal struggle against these traits and opening up myself more and more to the softer side of life. Its very easy to pretend your side is "technically correct, thus the best kind of correct" and develop a sort of moral superiority over others, especially if you and your peer group dismiss others as "stupid" because you only value what you perceive as "smarts." Look at how often STEM types dismiss non-STEM fields as useless pedantry.
I think in the case of Islamic extremism, its well known that suicide bomber recruiters focus on oddballs and loners. These types have less to lose and may be easier to convert. INTJ males are often have loner traits. These recruiters aren't stupid. They know how to spot these types of weaknesses and use them for their own gain.
My own life has been a personal struggle against these traits and opening up myself more and more to the softer side of life. Its very easy to pretend your side is "technically correct, thus the best kind of correct" and develop a sort of moral superiority over others, especially if you and your peer group dismiss others as "stupid" because you only value what you perceive as "smarts." Look at how often STEM types dismiss non-STEM fields as useless pedantry.
I think in the case of Islamic extremism, its well known that suicide bomber recruiters focus on oddballs and loners. These types have less to lose and may be easier to convert. INTJ males are often have loner traits. These recruiters aren't stupid. They know how to spot these types of weaknesses and use them for their own gain.
One hypothesis proposed in the article indeed was:
"What exactly about engineers’ mindset or cognitive disposition could make them a good match for this ideological cocktail? We can conjecture that engineering as a degree might be relatively more attractive to individuals seeking cognitive ‘‘closure’’ and clear-cut answers as opposed to more open-ended sciences – a disposition which has been empirically linked to conservative political attitudes (Jost et al. 2003; Amodio et al. 2007). Engineering is a subject in which individuals with a dislike for ambiguity might feel comfortable."
(But mind you, that is not the author's main hypothesis).
"What exactly about engineers’ mindset or cognitive disposition could make them a good match for this ideological cocktail? We can conjecture that engineering as a degree might be relatively more attractive to individuals seeking cognitive ‘‘closure’’ and clear-cut answers as opposed to more open-ended sciences – a disposition which has been empirically linked to conservative political attitudes (Jost et al. 2003; Amodio et al. 2007). Engineering is a subject in which individuals with a dislike for ambiguity might feel comfortable."
(But mind you, that is not the author's main hypothesis).
Holding a classic liberal, or libertarian, philosophy and having strong feelings of empathy and compassion are not mutually exclusive. It is a logical fallacy to assume that because one is opposed to the government doing something that person is against that thing being done at all.
>My pet theory is that INTJ males are prone to extremism. We see it here with this kind of pie-in-the-sky Libertarianism and other fringe views.
Well that's insulting. I'm a socialist!
Well that's insulting. I'm a socialist!
My theory:
Engineers tend to be biased towards solutions that are the result of actions they can take.
Political problems are the opposite of engineering, often the best action you can take is an indirect and uncertain persuasion aimed at getting some group to not directly oppose your interests. So, in the face of great injustice, real or perceived; those of a political mindset will try to establish coalitions, those of an engineering mindset will want to do something even if it's ineffective.
Engineers tend to be biased towards solutions that are the result of actions they can take.
Political problems are the opposite of engineering, often the best action you can take is an indirect and uncertain persuasion aimed at getting some group to not directly oppose your interests. So, in the face of great injustice, real or perceived; those of a political mindset will try to establish coalitions, those of an engineering mindset will want to do something even if it's ineffective.
[deleted]
Assuming this is true, it is very bizarre. There is a very large and fundamental difference between fundamentalist Islam groups and pretty much everybody else on the planet. It doesn't even really have to do with the religious beliefs per se. The issue is that portions of Islamic culture did not go through the Enlightenment that produced most of the thinking that undergirds pretty much the whole planet except for a few pockets, with a few primarily Islamic societies prominent among them.
Most of us living in post-Industrialized nations can't even conceive of how a person in a pre-Enlightenment situation would think about the world. For instance, when you drop an object, it falls because of gravity, right? A pre-Enlightenment person would not see it that way. They would see the falling object as primarily an expression of the will of a god. Not a "supernatural" god. "Supernatural" suggests a separation from the natural. That separation comes from the Enlightenment. Without the Enlightenment, it doesn't exist. There is no 'physical world' here and a 'supernatural world' over there. There is only one world. The physical world, in all its operation, is an expression of a very real, very immediately present deity. This is a deity that punishes the wicked with sickness. It's why when it is time to plant crops, you ask the church, not an agriculturalist. It's why eternity is within arms reach. And it's why things like tolerance can not even be considered.
That being said, I wonder if these engineers are perhaps of post-Enlightenment beliefs, but swayed by less ideological factors, dominated by charismatic leaders and the like? I have a real hard time imagining that such pre-Enlightenment thinking can survive very long beyond contact with post-Enlightenment thinking. Then again, I might just be totally wrong on that. Post-enlightenment thinking doesn't promise you grand eternal wars between good and evil that every person is a soldier in with eternal life hanging in the balance.
Most of us living in post-Industrialized nations can't even conceive of how a person in a pre-Enlightenment situation would think about the world. For instance, when you drop an object, it falls because of gravity, right? A pre-Enlightenment person would not see it that way. They would see the falling object as primarily an expression of the will of a god. Not a "supernatural" god. "Supernatural" suggests a separation from the natural. That separation comes from the Enlightenment. Without the Enlightenment, it doesn't exist. There is no 'physical world' here and a 'supernatural world' over there. There is only one world. The physical world, in all its operation, is an expression of a very real, very immediately present deity. This is a deity that punishes the wicked with sickness. It's why when it is time to plant crops, you ask the church, not an agriculturalist. It's why eternity is within arms reach. And it's why things like tolerance can not even be considered.
That being said, I wonder if these engineers are perhaps of post-Enlightenment beliefs, but swayed by less ideological factors, dominated by charismatic leaders and the like? I have a real hard time imagining that such pre-Enlightenment thinking can survive very long beyond contact with post-Enlightenment thinking. Then again, I might just be totally wrong on that. Post-enlightenment thinking doesn't promise you grand eternal wars between good and evil that every person is a soldier in with eternal life hanging in the balance.
That abstract reads strangely to me.
"This article demonstrates that among violent Islamists engineers with a degree, individuals with an engineering education are three to four times more frequent than we would expect given the share of engineers among university students in Islamic countries."
That sounds like they started with a sample of "violent Islamists engineers with a degree" and found lots of people with engineering degrees! I must be misunderstanding this, but I did do an engineering degree rather than "social science".
"This article demonstrates that among violent Islamists engineers with a degree, individuals with an engineering education are three to four times more frequent than we would expect given the share of engineers among university students in Islamic countries."
That sounds like they started with a sample of "violent Islamists engineers with a degree" and found lots of people with engineering degrees! I must be misunderstanding this, but I did do an engineering degree rather than "social science".
They are saying:
(violent extremists with engineering degrees) / (violent extremests with degrees) != (university students in engineering in Islamic country) / (university students in Islamic country)
(violent extremists with engineering degrees) / (violent extremests with degrees) != (university students in engineering in Islamic country) / (university students in Islamic country)
A few more links on this phenomenon:
1)http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/200...
2)http://www.gnxp.com/new/2009/12/30/the-engineer-terrorist/
1)http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/200...
2)http://www.gnxp.com/new/2009/12/30/the-engineer-terrorist/
Islamic groups also seems to attract redheads. Watch out for Ginger Engineers! http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/09/09/ginger-jihadis-wh...
[deleted]
There's another article on why there are so many gingers among Islamic Radicals. Perhaps the question we really should ask is are engineers really such a segregated minority that we are vulnerable to the same things as other segregated minorities are?
[deleted]
Most of the 9/11 hijackers were civil engineers
Given the objectives, that would be the right person for the job. I'm sure demolition knowledge would be particularly useful. Cyber attacks would be IT types, ground attacks are fighters, etc.
Jihadist Listing: Looking for terrorist ninjas to join a team looking to disrupt the most iconic verticals. Preference given to individuals with degrees in civil engineering, demolition, etc.
- competitive salary - 401k - 3 weeks vacation plus 5 floating days off - contract to hire
Jihadist Listing: Looking for terrorist ninjas to join a team looking to disrupt the most iconic verticals. Preference given to individuals with degrees in civil engineering, demolition, etc.
- competitive salary - 401k - 3 weeks vacation plus 5 floating days off - contract to hire
Maybe it's because engineers have a mentality of 'teardown' and 'rebuild'. Bankers and corporations infiltrated the US government? Teardown everything. Rebuild. Screw the women and children. Destroy America. We need to start from scratch.
What these people don't realize is you can change from within. We have elected government officials for a reason. Guess what? 85% of congress people are white and male (and many of them old). I'm gonna guess most of the bankers are white and male (and old). You want change? vote some women in. vote some minorities in. They're not part of the boy's network. They will take care of the disadvantaged.
US is the best country for a reason. We have a good system of representatives and freedoms of speech and protest. People on this board seem to love Russia and China. Guess what? Russia is ruled by a dictator, and China is ruled by a group of men. China's gdp per capita is $6000, with endless pollution. In Russia, entrepreneurs get jailed and poisoned and their companies get stolen away. You love those countries so much? go move there.
What these people don't realize is you can change from within. We have elected government officials for a reason. Guess what? 85% of congress people are white and male (and many of them old). I'm gonna guess most of the bankers are white and male (and old). You want change? vote some women in. vote some minorities in. They're not part of the boy's network. They will take care of the disadvantaged.
US is the best country for a reason. We have a good system of representatives and freedoms of speech and protest. People on this board seem to love Russia and China. Guess what? Russia is ruled by a dictator, and China is ruled by a group of men. China's gdp per capita is $6000, with endless pollution. In Russia, entrepreneurs get jailed and poisoned and their companies get stolen away. You love those countries so much? go move there.
Operation Earnest Voice - the post
ridiculous!
But according to Obama, Muslims are radicalized because there aren't enough jobs.
Then they mention that it could be random effects - an extremist group that's strong in an engineering school would of course recruit more extremists, for example. But they dismiss that with "well we didn't notice that" and go head on with their personality argument. Similarly with a tech-based recruitment argument.
Then, they go on to "prove" how most engineers are right-wing conservative (which is a very American position) by looking at a study of 9000 Americans (what a non-representative sample) and finding that 57% self-identified as so. Then they stretch this conclusion to extremists everywhere.
They mention that engineering is a stepping stone profession in a lot of the middle east, that families encourage their kids to be some kind of engineer, because of better career opportunities. They also mention that there is a selective entry process and the title of "engineer" is an honorable one (which I think may be a bit exaggerated but whatever).
No mention of the fact that engineering is super broad and includes tons of subcategories and professions, and thus a larger cross-section of the population in general.
No mention that because of this broad variety of subfields, even though some programs have high entry requirements, the overall entry process can't be nearly as social-class selective as something like medicine, where you need money even to prep for entry.
No mention that an engineering education doesn't necessarily expose you to more progressive (or western-oriented if you want to be cynical) ideals like a law or humanities or social sciences degree does.
They just slap on their own narrative. This is shoddy work IMHO. How did this even pass peer review?