Are Chemists Less Esteemed Than Physicists?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Okki2
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the claim that chemists are "failed physicists," a notion that is dismissed as overly simplistic and unfounded. Participants argue that each scientific discipline has its own complexities and merits, making direct comparisons difficult. The historical context provided by Aristotle's ranking of vocations is critiqued, with many asserting that such hierarchies are outdated and do not reflect the realities of modern science. Chemists are noted for their practical contributions to society, often engaging in extensive laboratory work, while physicists are recognized for their theoretical explorations of fundamental concepts. The debate also touches on the perceived mathematical sophistication of chemists versus physicists, with some expressing bias against chemists based on this criterion. Overall, the conversation highlights the diversity of thought within scientific fields and the importance of respecting each discipline's unique challenges and contributions.
  • #61
confinement said:
If I really thought that philosophers did not say anything meaningful then I would put them in the same category as raving lunatics. Do you look down on raving lunatics? Let's leave mental illness out of this, let's say that they choose to be lunatics (actually I guess that is the popular definition of a philosopher).

Maybe it is just a language problem; do you look up to some professions more than others ? Then, if later in life you belonged to one of the professions that you held in higher esteem but your rankings had stayed the same, wouldn't you then be looking down on the careers that you previously had looked up to less?

For example, I certainly don't think being a chemist is a bad thing. When I was young I could say "I look down at criminals and capitalists, I look up to chemists and engineers, and I look up to to physicists to an even greater degree." Now that I am a physicist I am required to 'look down' at chemists in order to maintain self-consistency, but that doesn't mean that I think chemist are bad, just less good.

Wow, you're rationalizing your own arrogance.

I'd like to know how you reconsile:

"For example, I certainly don't think being a chemist is a bad thing."

with:

"I look down on chemists"


Mumbo-Jumbo-Gumbo!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
And ? Did you find the rationalization to be rational ?
 
  • #63
confinement said:
If I really thought that philosophers did not say anything meaningful then I would put them in the same category as raving lunatics. Do you look down on raving lunatics? Let's leave mental illness out of this, let's say that they choose to be lunatics (actually I guess that is the popular definition of a philosopher).

Maybe it is just a language problem; do you look up to some professions more than others ? Then, if later in life you belonged to one of the professions that you held in higher esteem but your rankings had stayed the same, wouldn't you then be looking down on the careers that you previously had looked up to less?

For example, I certainly don't think being a chemist is a bad thing. When I was young I could say "I look down at criminals and capitalists, I look up to chemists and engineers, and I look up to to physicists to an even greater degree." Now that I am a physicist I am required to 'look down' at chemists in order to maintain self-consistency, but that doesn't mean that I think chemist are bad, just less good.

Well if you are talking about it in terms of you respecting one more than another, I understand. I interpreted your looking down on comments in a more disrespectful way than you intended I guess. Maybe you could have used a less harsh term to get your point across... If you feel superior to chemists (in a non disrespectful way), that's fine, its your opinion. No beef... errr gumbo... here
 
  • #64
everybody is a philosopher, it seems. there's a reason philosophy is a lounge subforum.
 
  • #65
confinement said:
And ? Did you find the rationalization to be rational ?

Nope.

"Chemists are not bad, just less good".

That's a pretty ambiguous statement. Actually, its a statement of disrespect towards chemists.
 
  • #66
Proton Soup said:
everybody is a philosopher, it seems. there's a reason philosophy is a lounge subforum.

I only see one "philosopher" here. Everyone else is trying to fend his trickery off!
 
  • #67
Cyrus and NBAJam, I say without sarcasm that you really have gotten through to me. I never meant that chemists were bad or unworthy of respect and admiration. As I said, I am only maintaining self consistency.

Cyrus said:
I'd like to know how you reconsile:

"For example, I certainly don't think being a chemist is a bad thing."

with:

"I look down on chemists"

The reconcilliation occurs as purely logical technicality. I have always considered physicists to be greater than chemists, and I am physicist, therefore I look down on chemists.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K