Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Why are there few scientists/engineers in politics?

  1. Jan 24, 2014 #1
    Lots of scientists go to Wall Street after getting their PhD. But not many go on to make political careers for themselves. One of my favorite physicists ever was Edward Teller, who spent most of his later years advising the White House on the Russian ICBM threat. Why aren't there more people like him today?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 24, 2014 #2

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Being a science adviser should not be called "going into politics".

    Scientists are taught to tell the truth and politicians are taught to lie. Oil and water.
     
  4. Jan 25, 2014 #3

    AlephZero

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Old Chinese proverb: wise men should not argue with fools, because those who overhear the argument may judge wrongly who is wise and who is foolish.
     
  5. Jan 25, 2014 #4
    Feynman was pretty much installed at Cal Tech by the government in order to be on tap for the Atomic Energy Commission. When someone from the AEC called with a question, he dropped everything else to address it.

    I would imagine the government currently has scores of scientists all over the country who are "on tap" in this way. The need for their advise is probably not constant enough to give them a dedicated full-time advisor job.
     
  6. Jan 25, 2014 #5

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.

    There are 2 physicists, 3 other scientists, 1 mathematician and 6 engineers in Congress now. There are a lot of lawyers in Congress, to be sure, but there are also a lot of lawyers in society - there are about 50x as many law school graduates as physics graduates.
     
  7. Jan 25, 2014 #6

    jtbell

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Do you have a reference for this?
     
  8. Jan 25, 2014 #7
    Margaret Thatcher was a chemist.
     
  9. Jan 25, 2014 #8

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Why bother with all the hard work learning something irrelevant if you just want to be a politician?
     
  10. Jan 25, 2014 #9
    Could say the same for Wall Street, but there are plenty of scientists there.
     
  11. Jan 25, 2014 #10
    They do the math for the big time traders. Anyone ever see the documentary Quants the Alchemists of Wall Street?

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2014
  12. Jan 25, 2014 #11
  13. Jan 27, 2014 #12
    Angela Merkel chancellor of Germany was a research scientist.Merkel worked and studied at the Central Institute for Physical Chemistry of the Academy of Sciences in Berlin-Adlershof from 1978 to 1990. After being awarded a doctorate (Dr. rer. nat.) for her thesis on quantum chemistry,[22] she worked as a researcher and published several papers.
    What is it with chemistry and the first high office acheived by women in western democratic countries.
     
  14. Jan 27, 2014 #13

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    This is quite a fanciful proposition. I can't imagine Feynman being 'installed' in any position, by the government or any one else.

    Before the Manhattan Project, Feynman was an assistant prof. at U. Wisconsin-Madison. During the war, he was on a leave of absence from this position while he worked for the Army. After the war, Feynman had taught at Cornell U. in Ithaca, NY for 5 years. He had turned down an offer to work at IAS at Princeton because he wanted to teach. Eventually, Feynman chose to accept an offer from Caltech, in no small part because of the climate, because he hated having to put tire chains on his car during a snow storm at Ithaca (from his autobio "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman").

    Certainly, if the govt. had wanted Feynman or any other scientist 'on tap', they would have found a position for him closer to DC. It is difficult to remember now, but during the war, Feynman was not as big a deal as he became later in his career. He was a newly minted PhD. who was an assistant prof. at a midwestern state U. in 1942 with no atomic energy cred. It wasn't until long after the war that he began the work which led to his Nobel Prize, and he was not one of the scientists who worked on the H-bomb, having become depressed following his work on the A-bomb..
     
  15. Jan 27, 2014 #14

    D H

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    This question isn't about Feynman, or about the JASONs, or any other technical advisor to the government. There's a huge difference between being a technical advisor to the government and being a politician, i.e., someone who is elected by some constituency to some public office.

    This New York Times editorial proffers a reason: Americans don't like scientists and engineers. Our knowledge and our rational behavior run contrary to the intentional ignorance and irrational beliefs of large chunks of the US electorate. There has long been an anti-intellectual tilt to the US (e.g., bumper stickers that read "my son beat up your honor student") that is not nearly as strong in other developed countries.

    This blog at DailyKos proffers a simpler reason: While it is highly advantageous for lawyers to enter into politic, it is highly disadvantageous for scientists and engineers to do so. We can't afford take the time off our workaholic / highly competitive careers to campaign, let alone win the election. Winning the election means our careers as scientists and engineers are sunk. A scientist who is two years out of date is an ex-scientist.
     
  16. Jan 27, 2014 #15

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    It's the same theme that I've stated quite a while back when I had a front-seat look at the closing of the High Flux Beam Reactor at Brookhaven. It is why I continue to have a skeptical and pessimistic view that the general public can make a rational, informed decision on anything, and why a scientist, without any bells and whistles, would not make it.

    When I attended a TIPP conference a few years ago, Bill Foster had just lost his congressional seat, and he came and gave a talk on the final day about life as a scientist in the US Congress. His main point was that the overwhelming majority of our elected officials ".. simply don't quite grasp quantitative versus qualitative information..." In other words, simple persuasive arguments are often sufficient without proper data or anything to back those arguments. (You may still get a copy of his Powerpoint presentation at this link).

    Unfortunately, if scientists simply brush off politics, we will let the ignorant run the place. This old article from the NY Times (Vernon Ehlers has since retired) showed how ignorant certain politicians can be, AND, are too lazy to even do simple, basic research. I can cite many more instances where these politicians simply had no clue about what they decided on, AND, didn't feel any problem on making a decision based on pure ignorance.

    So these are some of the type of people that got elected and got to make legislation. Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy, doesn't it?

    Zz.
     
  17. Jan 27, 2014 #16

    Office_Shredder

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Lots of scientists/engineers are on wall street because they have the skills that are required for the job, it is relatively easy to enter, and there is a lot of money on tap. If you have the right skills you can apply and get a 6 figure job in a firm without too much hassle.

    On the other hand, if I wanted to be a representative and I am not independently rich I would have to spend a lot of time working up the political ladder, getting connections for political and monetary support to fuel my campaign. Becoming a politician is a lot more additional work for someone who already has math and programming skills than getting a job on wall street.
     
  18. Jan 27, 2014 #17
    As I recall (making no guarantees about my memory), this "installation" was done through Oppenheimer. The government asked Oppenheimer who he thought were the important voices in nuclear physics and he named Feynman among others. The offer from CalTech was prompted by either the government or Oppenheimer on behalf of the government, asking them to make this offer.

    As I said, I don't have a copy of the book in which I suspect this is laid out. I do have a copy of Genius by James Gleick in which there is an allusion to the government's hand behind Feynman being at Cal Tech:

    "Feynman made his escape shortly after arriving in Pasadena. He accepted Caltech's offer of an immediate sabbatical year and fled to the most exotic place he could find [Brazil]. The State Department had subsidized his salary. For the first time since Far Rockaway he could spend days at the beach..."

    p.283
     
  19. Jan 27, 2014 #18

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Physics, like a lot of professions, has an 'old boy' network. Certainly, a reference from Oppenheimer would open a lot of doors to a relative unknown like Feynman.

    I base my opinion on a personal appraisal of Feynman's various autobios. (Surely, You're joking ...). IMO, Feynman was not one to be easily pegged into a safe teaching position for the convenience of the government. I think Feynman was not one who was awed by government or large institutions, which was why his work on the Rogers Commission (which investigated the Challenger disaster) was so pointed and illuminating: there was more to his work on this inquiry than the famous O-ring demonstration he performed for the cameras.

    Although Feynman later worked on QED and other questions dealing with atomic structure, he seems to have avoided working on atomic energy and does not appear to have been a hawk, like Edward Teller. His time at Los Alamos was a source of lifelong personal sadness due to the illness and death of his first wife. While Feynman appears willing to serve when an interesting question arose, as it did with the Challenger, I can't see him as a 'hired gun' for the govt. or anyone else.
     
  20. Jan 27, 2014 #19

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    I'm finding it very hard to find the relevance on the issue of who hired Feynman at CalTech with the topic of discussion of this thread.

    Zz.
     
  21. Jan 27, 2014 #20

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I wouldn't worry too much that more scientists are in key positions of the Chinese government than in the US government. After all, it's not like the typical Chinese official had to run a campaign except where it counted: to the Chinese Communist Party.

    In the West, study of the law gives an edge to the aspiring politician first because if, once elected, you are not writing the law, you are charged with enforcing or administering the law. Second, the law student is exposed to and trained in the forensic arts, where he must persuade others to his point of view by oral or written debate. This training and experience are invaluable in such a visible undertaking as politics. Science and engineering by their nature do not lend themselves to such advantages in the preparation of the aspiring statesman.

    The notion that in the US the scientist or engineer is at a disadvantage to entering politics due to some supposed unpopularity of these professions to the public at large betrays IMO a prejudice held in certain quarters of the editorial corral. It used to be that a Thomas Edison, a Henry Ford, a Henry Kaiser, could make news like the most awful of today's celebrities and were just as popular. To be sure, these men all had personal flaws, but at least they tried to leave a better world behind.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Why are there few scientists/engineers in politics?
  1. Political Scientists (Replies: 10)

Loading...