Are Chemists Less Esteemed Than Physicists?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Okki2
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the perceived esteem of chemists compared to physicists, exploring themes of academic rigor, historical perspectives, and subjective opinions on the nature of scientific disciplines. Participants engage in a debate about the value and difficulty of chemistry versus physics, touching on personal experiences and philosophical viewpoints.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the idea of chemists being "failed physicists" is unfounded, comparing it to other professions and emphasizing the unique challenges of each discipline.
  • Historical perspectives are introduced, with references to Aristotle's ranking of vocations based on abstraction and pragmatism, suggesting a hierarchy that some participants challenge.
  • One participant expresses respect for chemists, citing the difficulty of organic chemistry as a personal experience.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of scientific inquiry, with some arguing that chemistry is a branch of physics, while others assert that each discipline has its own complexities that cannot be directly compared.
  • Some participants express a belief that the mathematical sophistication of theoretical physicists is higher than that of chemists, leading to a perceived superiority in the field of physics.
  • Others argue against the notion of superiority, suggesting that different scientific disciplines serve different purposes and that success in creating predictive models is a strength of chemistry.
  • Several participants engage in playful banter about the rivalry among scientists from different fields, noting cultural traditions of teasing between chemists, physicists, and biologists.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the esteem of chemists versus physicists. Multiple competing views remain, with some defending the value of chemistry and others asserting a hierarchy that favors physics.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include subjective biases expressed by participants, varying definitions of "esteem," and the complexity of comparing the rigor and contributions of different scientific disciplines.

  • #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!
 
Chemistry 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
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K