What are the intellectually MOST rigorous jobs?

[Pengwuino]

I'm actually starting to come around to this idea that you can train people for most jobs in a years time. When you think about it, a year is a LONG time to train for a single job. When you get your college education, you're training for work in an entire field in most cases, not just a single job. Although I think the caveat is whether or not someone with a high school education is intellectually mature enough to "think outside the box" at their job.

I digress though, I only really know one field to any decent extent!

 

[Maxwell]

A sample of about 40 jobs of friends, family members etc. Most of what you need to know apart from what you've learned in high school to do the job, can be learned in about a year's time.

An uncle of mine is an engineer. When new engineers are hired he has to supervise them in the first few months. He often complains about the new recruits not knowing even the basic things. It was he who told me that you could take a high schooler, give him half a year's training and he'll do just fine. He claims that it is true for most jobs.

The more I thought about that, the more I agreed with him. Change the half a year to a year and it is almost universially true except for very specialized jobs like surgeons and plumbers.

So you're talking about entry level jobs. The original post, and your original claim, was regarding jobs in general. The original poster was inquiring after intellectually rigorous careers in general, not just entry level positions.

Let me tell you right away - a high schooler with a year of training won't be doing the same work as an engineer, physicist, or mathematician with advanced degrees working in industry (in their field).

There are jobs that just require you to have a degree, but that is a different situation.

It sounds like you are still in college and have not started your career yet. Obtain your MS or PhD, get a job in industry, and work for a few years. Then let me know if you still have the same opinion.

 

[Count Iblis]

I obtained my Ph.D quite a while ago and I'm self employed. I actually started working when I was 14 for my dad who was also an engineer like my uncle. I was far ahead with my math and physics. My father would be working on project involving thermodynamical calculations for powerplant designs and I would assist him with that.

I could help my dad, because I had mastered calculus, could compute integrals, solve differential equations, was able to write programs to do these things numerically, was able to solve nonlinear equations via iteration techniques, etc. etc.

I learned all that from my father's university books myself in just a few years (from age 12 onwards). I just spent a few hours per week studying math.

So, here you have an example of someone almost from primary school who was able to do a job for which university degrees are asked. And I didn't even get specialized training from my dad in engineering.

 

[chroot]

Count Iblis, you are clearly not a representative example of all 12 year olds. Also, your education was not obtained via primary school, it was obtained by close interaction with a very well-educated tutor, your father. Few children as are fortunate.

It's totally laughable to extend your own personal experiences to the claim that "there are almost no jobs that requires more knowledge than the average high school student can master in half a year."

Do you know what average means?

- Warren

 

[Maxwell]

I obtained my Ph.D quite a while ago and I'm self employed. I actually started working when I was 14 for my dad who was also an engineer like my uncle. I was far ahead with my math and physics. My father would be working on project involving thermodynamical calculations for powerplant designs and I would assist him with that.

I could help my dad, because I had mastered calculus, could compute integrals, solve differential equations, was able to write programs to do these things numerically, was able to solve nonlinear equations via iteration techniques, etc. etc.

I learned all that from my father's university books myself in just a few years (from age 12 onwards). I just spent a few hours per week studying math.

So, here you have an example of someone almost from primary school who was able to do a job for which university degrees are asked. And I didn't even get specialized training from my dad in engineering.

... all of that IS high school work. I was doing most of that in high school as well (calculus and programming). Not one thing you mentioned is something a mathematician, engineer, or physicist with an MS or PhD would be doing in industry for a company. They might use those tools and techniques, but certainly not as a focus. They are just expected to know it and use it if necessary.

To be completely honest, I'm not sure I believe you. I think you're making a lot of this stuff up in order to make your extreme opinion more acceptable.

What was your PhD in?

 

[MissSilvy]

I'm guessing you don't have children.

You don't need to be a professional chef to know when something tastes rotten. I don't need to be a parent in order to know that comparing physicists, lawyers, or wall street traders to parents is silly and a cultural bromide that lacks meaning. As I have acknowledged before, it is a physically and mentally demanding job but most certainly NOT intellectually.

However, if it makes parents feel better to think that they have the most difficult job or that one needs substantial talents to be a parent, by all means go ahead. Don't let reality rain on your parade.

 

[turbo]

Outside of academia there are almost no jobs that requires more knowledge than the average high school student can master in half a year.

Really? Have you ever been asked to trouble-shoot a paper machine that is making NO money and costing many tens of thousands of dollars an hour to operate while it is spitting out garbage? I have. After 4 years as a process chemist in a pulp mill and 6 years as the lead operator on one of the world's most complex paper machines and a few more years as a training consultant to the industry, I had earned a reputation for being able to isolate and identify problems quickly. In nearly every case, I was pitted against engineers, technicians, chemists, and their supervisors who were absolutely convinced that they were going to solve their problems in-house and not listen to an outsider. A paper-machine superintendent may get his nose bent out of shape when upper management brings in an outsider, but guess what? The production manager and his bosses all look like golden-boys when you fix their problem. I'd like to see a HS graduate with a year's training pull that off. You need a practical knowledge of mechanics, hydraulics, thermodynamics, hydrodynamics, and at least a bit of "human engineering" to pull this stuff off (at a minimum!). BTW, I have 3-1/2 years of college with no degree - just a LOT of hands-on experience.

On a couple of jobs, I was teamed up with a top troubleshooter from Beloit (manufacturer of paper machines) that had taught me a lot during the start-up of our machine. He had no degree, either. On one project, we split the machine at about the mid-point and I examined the "wet end" (pumps, headbox, fourdrinier, press, etc) while he examined the dryers and other systems in the "dry end". We met before noon and I told him what I found (lack of following proper procedure for raising and securing the breast roll was distorting the impingement of the jet of stock and water onto the fourdrinier wire, causing a BAD wet streak). He came to take a look, concurred, called a meeting with the mill's management, and gave me the floor. The machine supervisors and the engineering staff (not wanting to look bad) essentially told the top brass that I was full of ****, at which point, the old guy stood up and said "Take his advice and you'll be back in production before the day's out. Ignore it and you'll be looking for new jobs pretty soon." and we left the meeting. The mill manager followed us out and asked for details about the misalignment of the breast roll. I gave him the details, and my old mentor nodded and told him that his staff was covering their asses and probably knew that I was right, and that he should make sure that they followed my recommendations and re-started the machine, before claiming that they had performed some alternate miracle to solve the problem. We made a bunch of toothless enemies and a couple of very powerful friends that day. BTW, he's likely dead by now, but my mentor's first name was Omega. He claimed that his mother declared "no more" when he was born.

I know a lot about paper machines. Omega knew more. Neither of us gained that expertise in "a year of training" nor could we have gotten it in college with doctoral degrees and post-doc research. Academics get paid to do what they do, but in the real world, people who get results are in high demand.

 

[j93]

I obtained my Ph.D quite a while ago and I'm self employed. I actually started working when I was 14 for my dad who was also an engineer like my uncle. I was far ahead with my math and physics. My father would be working on project involving thermodynamical calculations for powerplant designs and I would assist him with that.

I could help my dad, because I had mastered calculus, could compute integrals, solve differential equations, was able to write programs to do these things numerically, was able to solve nonlinear equations via iteration techniques, etc. etc.

I learned all that from my father's university books myself in just a few years (from age 12 onwards). I just spent a few hours per week studying math.

So, here you have an example of someone almost from primary school who was able to do a job for which university degrees are asked. And I didn't even get specialized training from my dad in engineering.

You obviously have no clue what youre talking about and don't realize how inessential the tasks given to you were. If you think youre right about being able to train a HS student in a year to do most jobs outside of academia based on the experiences you described youre still wrong because most freshman can obtain research experience where they do small calculations for a professor just as you described, wouldn't that mean by your logic that jobs in academia can be trained based on the conclusions you made for engineering. You all so have no intuition on what is average.

 

[j93]

You don't need to be a professional chef to know when something tastes rotten. I don't need to be a parent in order to know that comparing physicists, lawyers, or wall street traders to parents is silly and a cultural bromide that lacks meaning. As I have acknowledged before, it is a physically and mentally demanding job but most certainly NOT intellectually.

However, if it makes parents feel better to think that they have the most difficult job or that one needs substantial talents to be a parent, by all means go ahead. Don't let reality rain on your parade.

Seconded. If it was really intellectually demanding then it would be reasonable to institute a stringent certification system for parents before they can have children.

 

[arunma]

Regarding the original question...

Perhaps you might consider experimental physics? We have to know how to do physics, and we get to play with electronics and power tools. It's not a bad deal, if you're looking for intellectual rigor and hard work.

But to add a disclaimer, I probably only get to do physics about once or twice a year. Most of the time I'm just coding (ugh!) or something. So maybe it's not as intellectually rigorous as I like to think.

 

[j93]

Youre describing a field not a job.

 

[Mosis]

You don't need to be a professional chef to know when something tastes rotten. I don't need to be a parent in order to know that comparing physicists, lawyers, or wall street traders to parents is silly and a cultural bromide that lacks meaning. As I have acknowledged before, it is a physically and mentally demanding job but most certainly NOT intellectually.

However, if it makes parents feel better to think that they have the most difficult job or that one needs substantial talents to be a parent, by all means go ahead. Don't let reality rain on your parade.

Your analogy is irrelevant. You don't have to be a master chef to judge food, but you can't start claiming a particular dish is hard or not to prepare not having made it yourself. Likewise, you can't claim you know what being a parent is like (and you seem to really think you know what being a parent is like!) not having been a parent.

 

[Tobias Funke]

Can we just say that mathematicians and physicists have the most intellectually demanding jobs and be over with it? That should give everyone the emotional validation they need.

I have a feeling that some people define intellectually rigorous to mean "mathematical, physical stuff" anyway, so it's probably a losing battle to say otherwise.

 

[MissSilvy]

Your analogy is irrelevant. You don't have to be a master chef to judge food, but you can't start claiming a particular dish is hard or not to prepare not having made it yourself. Likewise, you can't claim you know what being a parent is like (and you seem to really think you know what being a parent is like!) not having been a parent.

Wonderful argument but based on incorrect assumptions. My friend is a young mother and has a one year old and a three year old, both which I frequently get stuck babysitting and taking places so I am familiar enough. Claiming that this is irrelevant experience because I don't do it all day, all week, all year is lunacy, but again, if it makes parents feel better to think they're special then who am I to reason against it?

And if parenting was such a difficult job, wouldn't most children turn out better instead of the high ratio of spoiled screw-ups and average Joes that seem to be prevalent today?

 

[Mosis]

And if parenting was such a difficult job, wouldn't most children turn out better instead of the high ratio of spoiled screw-ups and average Joes that seem to be prevalent today?

Um, it's precisely because parenting is a difficult job that there is such a high ratio of screw-ups and average Joes.

By the tone of your posts, it seems like you're just resentful because you didn't have the parents you wanted (with all this talk of parents trying to make themselves feel "special," or something).

 

[MissSilvy]

Um, it's precisely because parenting is a difficult job that there is such a high ratio of screw-ups and average Joes.

By the tone of your posts, it seems like you're just resentful because you didn't have the parents you wanted (with all this talk of parents trying to make themselves feel "special," or something).

Please spare me the psychoanalysis. My parents are wonderful people, though I'm not sure how that's relevant. I'm just tired of parents expecting everyone's sympathy and appreciation for a job that most of them don't even do very well. And a comparatively easy job at that.

Becoming a parent is a selfish decision by it's very definition but I would be perfectly alright with it if our culture wasn't so child-centered and parent worshiping. This includes those inane statements people seem to make about how 'haaaaard and difficult' parenting is and how it's a rigorous job.

I have better things to do than argue minute points like this. Judging by the tone of your posts, don't you have some child to be running after or something?

 

[chroot]

Let's knock it off with the parenting stuff. I think we can all agree that parenting requires hard work and intelligence. I think we can also all agree that parents do not require "rigor" in the same sense that mathematicians do. The OP's question was a little vague, but let's not let the thread descend into a petty fight over semantics.

- Warren

 

[j93]

Um, it's precisely because parenting is a difficult job that there is such a high ratio of screw-ups and average Joes.

By the tone of your posts, it seems like you're just resentful because you didn't have the parents you wanted (with all this talk of parents trying to make themselves feel "special," or something).

I love people on the internet attempting to win an argument through internet based psycho analysis.

 

[chroot]

Besides, Mosis' analysis is a non-sequitur. People could just as well be screw-ups and average Joes regardless of how they are parented.

- Warren

 

[getitright]

The most intellectually challenging job you will ever have will be the one that you are heavily trained in, highly qualified for and that your supervisor thinks they can accomplish better without benefit of the possibility of thought that someone could do it better than them.

If we knew what we were doing we wouldn't call it research - Al Einstein

 

[Math Is Hard]

Let's knock it off with the parenting stuff. I think we can all agree that parenting requires hard work and intelligence. I think we can also all agree that parents do not require "rigor" in the same sense that mathematicians do. The OP's question was a little vague, but let's not let the thread descend into a petty fight over semantics.

- Warren

I agree with this. If we want to talk about parenting, that could easily be a thread of its own.

I might be weird, but I've never asked myself what job I could do that was the most intellectually rigorous for me. When I was very young, I wanted to know

-what can I do that I am good at and people will pay me for.

Then, when I got a little older, I wanted to know

-what can I do that I am good at, that people will pay me for, that I feel good about doing.

And then when I got a little older than that, I wanted to know

-what can I do that I am good at that people will pay me for, and I feel good about doing, and get to work with nice people, too.

And now my criteria is even higher. I want to know

-what can I do that I am good at that people will pay me for, and I feel good about doing, and get to work with nice people, and can make a real and positive difference in my community or even the world.

I don't know if all people go through this shift in criteria, but it was true for me.

 

[Animastryfe]

What occupations involving the study or application of physics, engineering, or math are the most intellectually demanding?

Singling out physics, engineering and math is something that I see extremely often on a few of the more intellectual forums and blogs. Why is this? I mean, why not include chemistry or biology in there? I'm genuinely curious and very likely to be ignorant about this matter. I'll make a new topic about this (which forum would that fall under?) if answering this question is deemed to be too much of a tangent.

 

[Saladsamurai]

You guys have obviously never heard of Ninjas have you?

 

[DarrenM]

Singling out physics, engineering and math is something that I see extremely often on a few of the more intellectual forums and blogs. Why is this? I mean, why not include chemistry or biology in there? I'm genuinely curious and very likely to be ignorant about this matter. I'll make a new topic about this (which forum would that fall under?) if answering this question is deemed to be too much of a tangent.

Because we're on www.physicsforums.com. ;)

I kid; really, I was just phrasing that based on the OP's second post, which mentioned similar fields. I just wanted to steer away from the bickering, sniping, and witty quips. I imagine any 'scientific' field could be included in the question without straying too far afield.

 

[evilpostingmong]

You guys have obviously never heard of Ninjas have you?

I second.

 

[Howers]

Um, it's precisely because parenting is a difficult job that there is such a high ratio of screw-ups and average Joes.

By the tone of your posts, it seems like you're just resentful because you didn't have the parents you wanted (with all this talk of parents trying to make themselves feel "special," or something).

Right, and that's why we pay day care workers top dollar and require them to have 6+ years of post secondary schooling. Parenting is about as hard as working at a fast food joint, although with more hours. Its physically very straining, but it doesn't require much abstract thought to raise child. This is why just about anyone can pull it off, but very few can pull off college at the levels we are talking. Its an important job, don't get me wrong, but by definition it cannot be the hardest thing on earth, otherwise people who found it hard would have died off with their kids in the past.

You seem to regard doing a job and doing a job well as equivalent. As long as a minimum standard of job performance is upheld, I don't think that applies.

 

[Troponin]

Please spare me the psychoanalysis. My parents are wonderful people, though I'm not sure how that's relevant. I'm just tired of parents expecting everyone's sympathy and appreciation for a job that most of them don't even do very well. And a comparatively easy job at that.

Becoming a parent is a selfish decision by it's very definition but I would be perfectly alright with it if our culture wasn't so child-centered and parent worshiping. This includes those inane statements people seem to make about how 'haaaaard and difficult' parenting is and how it's a rigorous job.

I have better things to do than argue minute points like this. Judging by the tone of your posts, don't you have some child to be running after or something?

Becoming a parent did not feel like a selfish decision to me; I've had to become very selfless in many ways since becoming a parent.
I don't mind people having opinions, but it has been my experience that when people take an authoritarian stance on a subject they have no experience in, they don't typically do themselves well.

 

[avant-garde]

Singling out physics, engineering and math is something that I see extremely often on a few of the more intellectual forums and blogs. Why is this? I mean, why not include chemistry or biology in there? I'm genuinely curious and very likely to be ignorant about this matter. I'll make a new topic about this (which forum would that fall under?) if answering this question is deemed to be too much of a tangent.

YES! I am the OP and this is exactly what I was trying to ask!

Thanks for all the parenting-related debate though...

 

[symbolipoint]

Jobs, which require a good set of intelligence and hard work?

How is intellictual rigor quantified?

Certainly many topics at deep levels in or involving the natural sciences are intellectual rigorous. Possibly too many answers correspond to equal intellectual rigor (which suggests my question to the original topic question, so really, how is intellectual rigor quantified?)

 

[avant-garde]

Well, I was guessing there was a general consensus...