Engineering "types"

[Serious Name]

I've just noticed that in a lot of my engineering focused classes people have a few similar features.

1) Emotionless faces. My friend joined me for a robotics class (because who wouldnt want to mess with robots) and was FREAKED for a second because everyone gave her a blank stare when she walked in, even the TA. I just saw it as a normal response, she was new and everyone just turned to look.

2) All very logical and pragmatic. Dare to say "i feel that..." and someone will instantly comment on it. Thats to be expected, though.

3) Clothing is generally not loud. All simple colors. Even the well-dressed ones have simple shirts, with at most a modest design on them. NOTHING like Affliction shirts, which is just awesome.

4) Depending on the field, you are surrounded by S (mechanical, aerospace, electrical, etc) or N (nuclear, chemical, material). However, none of them like the idea of a rule that has exceptions (which is why most of them dislike chemistry).

I would type more, but I have chem (of course...). Maybe later.

[Creepy-male]

Chemistry is obviously Alfalfa domain.

[redbaron]

i have spent a lot of time thinking about which subjects would educate me so that i outqualify as many other people as possible.

generally i think NT subjects are the most academically essential, such that say, mathematicians become brilliant economists without economics education, more so than vice versa. however, if you have your ass in a book too much, sedentariness depletes one's likihood of say, a ST career like military. so perhaps say, applied mathematics is more qualifying than say, pure mathematics, overall.

of course it's very plausible to educate oneself in a less essential subject, and then a more essential subject later on. in a sense, this can be related to how one develops their Superid. the following are integral typings of subjects, not so much typings of the people in them. i think a type may frequently study any subject that is "homoaristocratic" (ST with NF, Alpha with Gamma, etc.)

and these are just approximations, and there are many subjects in between.

	(natura)(quanti)(social)(qualit)
(theore)ILI	LII	EII	IEI	(IN)
	physic	mathem	philos	litera
(global)LIE	ILE	IEE	EIE	(EN)
	eleEng	comSci	econom	sociol
(applie)LSE	SLE	SEE	ESE	(ES)
	civEng	crimin	managm	educat
(locali)SLI	LSI	ESI	SEI	(IS)
	logist	physio	pubSer	finArt
	(Te)	(Ti)	(Fi)	(Fe)

most chemists i've known were LII (and some SEI). most chemical engineers were LIE.

My SEI uncle was a chemical engineer. Eventually he moved into Human Resources.

[tereg]

Interesting because EE was my major in college.

[ArchonAlarion]

Lots of MBTI BS I be smellin....

Its not the field of interest. Its what you do in that field and how you do it.


I find classical sciences like chemistry and biology generally boring. I like macro-biology though.

I'd never be a physicist, but I enjoy topics about it.

I like history, economics, philosophy, sociology, etc.

Whatever I am interested in, however, I approach globally and holistically. I enjoy combining my interest into some nexus point where I can cross systems if I so choose.

But I think you'll find all sorts of people in any field. Especially one so broad as engineering.

[Brilliand]

Lots of MBTI BS I be smellin....

Its not the field of interest. Its what you do in that field and how you do it.


I find classical sciences like chemistry and biology generally boring. I like macro-biology though.

I'd never be a physicist, but I enjoy topics about it.

I like history, economics, philosophy, sociology, etc.

Whatever I am interested in, however, I approach globally and holistically. I enjoy combining my interest into some nexus point where I can cross systems if I so choose.

But I think you'll find all sorts of people in any field. Especially one so broad as engineering.

Every field has a sort of natural environment though, and a thought process that gives it its value. For instance, most of mathematics would be lost without - might maintain some number-crunching, but that's it.

You will find other types in the field, but they are either a) fulfilling auxilliary roles (i.e. secretarial work), b) focusing on functions that are not their ego functions or c) handling things in a way that is not usual for the field, and probably seems a bit odd to others in the field.

EDIT: You do often find a field with two or more very different and prominent sides to it, i.e. practice and theory. I'd count those as fields in their own right.

[ArchonAlarion]

Right which is basically what I was getting at (2nd paragraph).

Also EVERY type has either Ti/Fe or Fi/Te so a profession requiring proficiency in either Ti or Te can be undertaken by any type.

But yes, some fields are element specific enough where you will see a high percentage of certain types.

[Mediator Kam]

SEI=fine arts. Makes me sad because I suck at music and art.

I intend on doing the ILE job, computer science when I grow up big and tall.

AP Chemistry used to be hell on earth, but since I don't fall asleep in there anymore, it's been better.

[Mediator Kam]

thank you for linking me to that.

[jughead]

some of these categories need full wording. whats physio for example?

[Creepy-male]

Wouldn't something like economics have a lot more Ni than Ne?

Maybe it was just the way my school taught it \:

[jewels]

I knew an SEI chemist.

Also for engineers....
(these were guys)

mechanical: ENFp, ISTp, INFp
engineer/project manager: ESTJ, ENFp
software engineer: INTp
generic engineer: INTp, ISTj

I was surprised to find several INFp engineers and also ones who write code.