Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
IT Science

Engineers Have a Terrorist Mindset? 837

An anonymous reader writes "Do engineers have a way of looking at the world not all that different from terrorists? According to an article in the EE Times, they do. The story cites 'Engineers of Jihad,' a paper (pdf download) by two Oxford University sociologists, who found that graduates in science, engineering, and medicine are strongly overrepresented among Islamist movements. The paper also found that engineers are 'over-represented' among graduates who gravitate to violent groups. Authors Diego Gambetta and Steffen Hertog chalk this all up to what they call the 'engineering mindset,' which they define as 'a mindset that inclines them to take more extreme conservative and religious positions.' Is this just pop psychology masquerading as science?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Engineers Have a Terrorist Mindset?

Comments Filter:
  • Engineer's Syndrome (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Goaway ( 82658 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:05PM (#22223070) Homepage
    You could probably draw parallels to Engineer's Syndrome [google.com] here.
  • by trolltalk.com ( 1108067 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:07PM (#22223106) Homepage Journal

    the 'engineering mindset,' which they define as 'a mindset that inclines them to take more extreme conservative and religious positions.'

    All I can say is, thank god I'm an atheist!

  • The real cause (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DoofusOfDeath ( 636671 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:10PM (#22223158)
    Is that these groups often have R&D schedules adjusted by marketing majors. Hell, going through that a few times would radicalize my pet hamster.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:16PM (#22223250)
    Is this supposed to be funny? You thanking god for being an atheist?
  • Re:Why not? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gnick ( 1211984 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:19PM (#22223302) Homepage

    Many of the engineers I've known in college were absolutely convinced of tehir [sic] superiority and absolute rightness in all things.
    I suspect that's part of the issue. I'm an EE with a long-standing history of blowing stuff up. That said, I now work primarily trying to keep stuff from blowing up (or at least blowing up in some controlled environment.) Engineers make good terrorist candidates. They tend to:
    * Be intelligent and educated (Or if not intelligent, obsessive enough to make it through a tough school-path)
    * Have superiority complexes ("I know what's right and all differing opinions are wrong and should be corrected")
    * Be good problem solvers ("If I wanted to get around this security system, here's what I'd do...")
    * Know everything necessary to make good bombs
  • Two examples (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:21PM (#22223324)
    Yasser_Arafat: After returning to the University, Arafat studied civil engineering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasser_Arafat [wikipedia.org] Osama_Bin Laden: Some reports suggest bin Laden earned a degree in civil engineering in 1979, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_laden [wikipedia.org]
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mapkinase ( 958129 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:25PM (#22223378) Homepage Journal
    "I'm not sure I can even think of a single example"

    1. Ph.D. in science. Check.
    2. Islamic fundamentalist (is it a movement?). Check.

    Half of my mosque is of that type.

    Supporting Shari'a, strict dressing, beards and stuff.

    BOO!
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gnick ( 1211984 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:31PM (#22223490) Homepage
    About 1/4-1/3 of my EE graduate school was comprised of Indians/Pakistanis here in the US to study. They were great - Other than a strange obsession with Cricket, perfectly agreeable folks. However, there was another 1/4-1/3 here to study from China that were much harder to get along with. They refused to speak English except with the professors and had posters of Mao along with his poetry all over the half of the graduate-student office that they dominated. I don't want to sound xenophobic, but it was very strange.
  • by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:42PM (#22223656) Journal
    I am speaking as an engineer and Englishman here:

    The recent failed bomb attempts in London apparently had some engineers on the design team. People with a PhD in engineering as it happens.

    The fact that they failed to make a bunch of petrol and compressed propane cylinders explode, or even catch fire, is frankly quite pathetic. I think any self respecting engineer souldn't fail that badly (though I'm very glad they did fail). This certainly raises questions about the quality of the engineering department from which they got their PhDs. I have trouble believing that such incompetent engineers could really have performed any worthwhile, independent research.

    If the recruits only come from third rate institutions who don't have the candidates or the ability to churn out even half-way decent engineers, then we're no worse off having engineer-terrorists than normal terrorists.

    If you want an idea how bad if life would be if terrorists could get good engineers, then consider what would happen if this guy [interestingprojects.com] was recruited to the other side. Fortunatley the best engineers out there are far more interested in engineering stuff than they are in people. Since terrorism is about people, this does not incline them towards terrorism.

  • Re:Probably True (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pinkocommie ( 696223 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:44PM (#22223676)
    Sorry, shouldn't have included that on there, was somewhat off topic. But in any case my point wasn't just education but social justice. The issue is when things go off-balance beyond a certain degree where one can quite plainly see the injustices around them (even if they themselves aren't a target) people begin to rise up and say enough. Different people react differently and try to bring about change differently. But as other people said intelligent people have a higher probability of moving forward with whatever they decide on.

    My point was more akin to by trying to minimize those kinds of problems you would have far fewer people motivated to 'fix' things which in a religious society often leads to religious solutions. If you read texts on why the Muslim countries fell off most treatements by Muslim authors focus on how the people stopped leading pious lives and were hence forsaken by God instead of actual issues such as economic competitiveness education etc

  • by smellsofbikes ( 890263 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @01:52PM (#22223806) Journal
    A previous poster pointed at Engineer's Syndrome [google.com], and I see some similar tendencies.

    Engineers -- and I'm speaking as someone who is doing an engineering job, surrounded by engineers, and from a family of engineers -- tend to favor experience more than empathy. They tend to think that if they're convinced something is right, it's for good reason, and once they're convinced, it takes some work to change their minds. More particularly, if they're convinced, they're unlikely to use someone else's experience as a guideline: they're less likely to put themselves in someone else's shoes to regard a problem from that standpoint.

    My own definition of Engineer Syndrome is encapsulated in the phrase, that I actually heard from one of my dad's coworkers once, "If you would've thought about this problem as much as I have, you'd agree with me." The level of premise and and patronization enclosed in that one sentence is staggering, but when it comes right down to it, I think many people drawn to engineering feel that way at some point or another. The consequence of this is that if someone else *doesn't* agree, the person suffering from ES thinks the other person is either stupid or stubbornly wrong, and either way, is a fool whose opinion is not to be regarded.

    Likewise, engineers come from a background where things are provably correct (mathematics) or experimentally verifiable (most of the rest of science and engineering) and take that sense of certainty and apply it in areas where it isn't applicable -- sociology, politics, art, places where it really does come down to opinion, where there isn't actually a right and wrong, just preference.

    The fundamental difference is that engineers do tend to rely on things that are provably correct or experimentally verifiable, whereas religious extremists are predicating invisible omnipotent entities. But the point is: if you have people who have this engineering set of mechanisms and filters for dealing with the world, and who believe in invisible omnipotent entities, they're going to have similar behavior to people who are drawn to engineering.
  • by LockeOnLogic ( 723968 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @02:09PM (#22224004)
    Please don't lump all psychology together. There is a very large difference between the psychodynamic approach to psychology and the more modern approaches such as cognitive neuroscience. New tools in brain imaging are finally giving us the tools needed to start unraveling the human mind. We've started to progress beyond the psuedo-philosophical past because we now have data to support our arguments. Considering we all have a brain (well, I doubt it with some people sometimes...) it's probably a good thing to have a better understanding of it. Sure we don't have neat equations to describe our field, but hey, even basic engineering started somewhere. The brain is a hell of a lot more complex than a bridge so it's going to take a while.
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gnick ( 1211984 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @02:31PM (#22224348) Homepage

    I'm sure if you were studying in China you'd be speaking English to your American friends
    It didn't bother me at all that they spoke their native language with each other. What was strange was that they refused to talk with the other students. They would literally act like they didn't know English unless they were speaking with the profs.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @02:36PM (#22224438)
    As a TA, they [the Asians] cheat too.
    I was stunned how many lab reports I would get where pages (page 1 versus page 2) just wouldn't match. I mean the fonts were different, one page would end mid-sentence the next would start in the middle of a different sentence, results were from labs that had been done a year before and the assignment altered in the meantime.

    I assume it is because they just really don't speak/write English. As such, written reports get passed around and they have no clue how they are mixing and matching them. They may be smart but they are unqualified to go to an English speaking school.
  • Unlikely (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @02:42PM (#22224548)
    People with degrees may be able to do more damage to infrastructure if they wanted, but they also have a lot more to lose by doing so. You'd have to pretty damn dedicated to take 4 years of engineering courses, turn down living in the upper middle class, and do something stupid like cutting down key electrical towers with a cutting torch (I'm ignoring dynamite fearmongering, a torch is much cheaper and easier to get).

    I have the knowlege to kill the power to NYC and the knowhow to carry it out. But why would I do something like that when on my salary I can have my 60+ (near)virgins NOW?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @02:56PM (#22224728)
    I've TA'd a graduate class before. The level of blatant cheating was disgusting. One of the (few) Americans in the class did fudge a test case, but with the internationals I had several groups copying from each other and from projects from previous semesters. MOSS found them. While the Indians and Pakistanis were apologetic and begged for mercy, some of the Chinese students acted like they were in a negotiation where they had some kind of power. Said they "can not accept" the letter-grade penalty the professor was handing out. Boy, those were some fun meetings.
  • by Zeinfeld ( 263942 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @03:09PM (#22224950) Homepage
    Slight clarification about that last point. We do in fact seem to hear a lot about "Inept Terrorists" in the news, although the news never reports them as inept, rather they spin it as the brave efforts of the police narrowly avoiding massive catastrophe.

    All the terrorists are inept, that does not stop them from being dangerous. The second generation of the Baader-Meinhof gang was litteraly recruited from a lunatic asylum. Catching inept criminals is still very difficult.

    The problem with the recent scare-ware announcements in the US is that they have tended to be of wannabees and never-was types. Such folk can become dangerous, but not as dangerous as the posturing and grandstanding that the likes of Freeh, Ridge, Ashcroft, Giuliani and the rest have engaged in.

    But comming back to the original question, yes having observed terrorists professionally for a number of years I would say that very few of them have what you would call a scientific mindset. They are not interested in enquiry, they have a complete ideological system that answers every question. They are certainly not interested in testing their precious little ideas.

    The other point of reference is that a scientist is not much use to a terrorist group, they want practical skills like how to blow stuff up. Bin Laden is a civil engineer, so hw knows the weak spots in building design. But most terrorists have no real engineering skill either.

  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @03:16PM (#22225066)
    Almost everyone in the middle east gets a higher education degree. They study and get their degrees and in their mid-20's they graduate without the ability to go to anymore school and NO JOB PROSPECTS. An inability to support their family drives them to religion and in some cases extremism where they blame all the problems in the middle east on not being religious enough (not pleasing god), or blame all the problems in the middle east on external forces. The problems in the middle east are economic. You have essentially a very small group that lives extravagantly using oil money and the rest of the population struggles to get by with no real jobs or careers that take advantage of their advanced degrees. The one exception seems to be the emirate of Dubai who actually appears to be starting a real economy.

    Until there is real social and economic changes in the middle east the countries will continue to breed extremists, because people without prospects for the future will always cause trouble. Saudi is the prime example but Iran is as well, the religious leaders live extremely well, probably in the top 5% economically in the country while the poor people in the villages in the outer reaches freeze to death in a snow storm. Until there is real economic freedom and equal justice for all the area is for the most part a lost cause. Run the oil wealth out and the countries won't be able to provide the minimal support their populations need to survive and then there will be real change.
  • by node 3 ( 115640 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @03:49PM (#22225536)
    Yeah, *that* doesn't sound like a fundamentalist mindset.

    Anyone who takes an idea and expands to into a universal absolute (with the exception of a few situations where this is reasonable, such as in math and physics) is a fundamentalist. That's what the Islamic terrorists are doing, is what strong libertarians do (which you appear to be, although you could be an objectivist--yet another form of fundamentalism).

    That's not to equate the evilness of all forms of fundamentalism, but merely to compare the mindset, which seems quite reasonable.

    As for engineers having that mindset, reading any form of geek site, it seems like there's a lot of fundamentalism among this group. GNU, the FSF, and much of Open Source shows *strong* signs of fundamentalism.

    Comparing engineers with terrorists is just sensationalism, but noting the level of fundamentalism among engineers, at least on the surface, seems worth investigating.
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mapkinase ( 958129 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @04:03PM (#22225770) Homepage Journal
    "If nothing else, the fact that a person can possess rational faculties sufficient to obtain a PhD while simultaneously adhering to the totally irrational and delusional tenets of religion is highly entertaining."

    I am quite entertained as well. I think the ability to make far-fetching logical conclusions using wrong implicit assumptions is also indicative of this disease.

    Let's see.

    "The ability to compartmentalize one's mind into two entirely separate and contradictory sides is an astonishing testament to the brain's plasticity. It basically makes a person schizophrenic"

    "contradictory". There is no contradiction. The Beautiful Qur'an pretty much starts with the statement that Islam is a belief in Unseen:

    2:2 This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah.
    2:3 Who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them;

    This pretty much ends the false dichotomy between Science and Faith. Science is by definition is the domain of Seen by experiment or experimentally verifiable logical conclusions of experiments.

    I cordially invite you, my invisible correspondent, to read the book with "plasticity" in your mind.
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by urcreepyneighbor ( 1171755 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @04:04PM (#22225792)

    A lot of these Chinese students have been taught all their lives that Americans are barbarians, decadent, corrupt, etc,etc...
    Which is largely true.

    Most American's are obsessed with idiotic physical competitions, are in debt up to their ass to pay for toys they don't need, and haven't ever lost sleep over the Fermi paradox.

    Don't get me wrong, please. I love America and the idea of America, I simply have a problem with most of the people occupying the land itself. :)

    Some of the Indians are that way too when they first get to the US. It's part culture shock and part xenophobia.
    Speaking strictly from personal experience, most Indian's - dots, not feathers - have been some of the most adaptable people I've known. Again, personal experience.

    The only time I can remember having a problem with an Indian was back in grade school. There was this cute Indian girl and her father went nuts whenever he caught us together. But, ah, I don't think that had anything to do with "culture shock" or "xenophobia". Ha!

    A lot of them get over it once they've been exposed to our culture and people for a while, and they realize what they were told before coming to the US is just one side of the story.
    Translation: they bang a couple dumb, slutty white girls and get good jobs. ;)
  • by TheCarp ( 96830 ) * <sjc@NospAM.carpanet.net> on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @04:13PM (#22225928) Homepage
    I am a liberal one and I disagree. I see liberalism or religiosity as orthogonal to the issue. I would say that the engineer mindset is one that is adaptable to many realms.

    I think it comes down to fundamental assumptions. I disagree on a fundamental level with a lot of terrorists. However, I have to say, if I believed some of the core things they believe, I would support the actions they take.

    Its a matter of putting a mind to a problem. My fundamental assumptions are that people should be allowed to determine their own destiny, there is no god, nonconsensual violence is wrong unless used as a last resort in response to the threat of violence. etc.

    However, if I saw myself as a member of a minority group, whose sworn enemy was the entire current "world order". Then I can totally see myself approaching this as an engineering problem, and well... the solution of "how do you fight" looks like terrorism.

    So I guess what I am saying is, I can totally see the link, not a matter so much of people perverted by science, but scientific and engineering thought patterns, derailed and corrupted by religion. Frankly, extremeism is the logical conclusion to some of the basic assumptions of religion.... and I see engineers as people who are more likely to follow something to its logical conclusion than others who are happier with vague contradictions.

    -Steve
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mapkinase ( 958129 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @04:18PM (#22226002) Homepage Journal
    I do not know about India or China, but in Soviet Russia (where I am from) the anti-American propaganda worked in this way: they basically told us more or less the truth (which I verified later) about bad stuff in US, like US indeed turned out to have more unimployed or homeless people compare to what we had in Soviet Russia.

    But what they never told us is all this good stuff about US which basically is much more rational organization in all aspects life: government, economy, religion, relationships, freedoms, etc. + much higher quality of life for people with technical background like myself (in Soviet Russia a bus driver had 3 times higher salary than a researcher in a government lab).

  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bombula ( 670389 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @04:23PM (#22226080)
    This pretty much ends the false dichotomy between Science and Faith.

    Anyone who honestly believes there is no contradiction between science (the application of critical thinking, the challenging of assumptions, and the use of an ever-expanding body of evidence to understand the universe) and religion (the demonization of critical thinking, the elevation of dogma and preservation of ignorance, and the use of iron-age superstition and irrationality to 'understand' the universe) is either ignorant, stupid, fucntionally schizophrenic (as I said in my first post) or all of the above.

    If you've actually read anything in the Quran, you'll know that eveyrthing I said about it earlier was true: it promotes a barbaric value system that any 21st Century child can see is hopelessly flawed. It is useless as a guide to creating a civil, open and free society, and it is useless as a guide to understanding the universe. That makes it pretty darn useless. The only thing it is really good at is perpetuating delusional wish-thinking about a nonexistant afterlife, and making otherwise normal people do diabolical and insane things in order to obtain an imaginary reward after death.

    Science is by definition is the domain of Seen by experiment or experimentally verifiable logical conclusions of experiments.

    All religions, including Islam, make explicit claims about reality. Reality is "the Seen." That's all reality is, and all it could possibly be. That's all human beings are - by definition - capable of knowing. There is no domain outside of reality. And this is the problem: religion doesn't just make senseless claims about imaginary things; it makes pernicious claims about reality that are patently false.

  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mikael ( 484 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @05:28PM (#22226996)
    There was an accidental social experiment that once happened some time ago (I don't know if this story is true or not). But one time, the booking system for campus rooms broke down. The admin staff do all they can to get everyone their own room. Over the following weeks, everyone starts reorganising themselves into groups based on course subject; musicians in one block, art students in another, and science students in yet another. It's not really racism or discrimination, people just prefer to be closer to those that share common interests.
  • by GargamelSpaceman ( 992546 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @05:54PM (#22227404) Homepage Journal
    I think you hit the nail on the head here. People who rely on logical thinking are more severely damaged by buying into baseless dogma because their first instinct is to take things to their logical conclusion. Those who don't do this are more resilient against the damaging effects of garbage in garbage out because they don't tend to make logical conclusions and base their actions upon those conclusions, but rather use the 'garbage in' to justify whatever they would have done anyway. I think much of the celebate clergy and other such religiously inspired Darwin Award winners are engineer types at core who got creamed by making the mistake of allowing garbage into their logical brains. The antidote to this is scientific scepticism. It keeps the logical mind sane. The only article of faith I've personally found it neccessary to have is that 'what happens in the future will resemble that which has happened in the past'. That bit of faith that there will be no miracles allows one to make predictions about the future from past experience. With all the dangerous and false information out there, I can't imagine a God that could qualify as good who would expect humans to accept any tenet or information as true without basis. I suppose the only critera that matters is how well off those who accept a fact tend to be, though if they be non-logical folk a logical person should beware that because of their nature they may not fare as well. Which ideas tend to work for logical folk? If you be one of them, then the answer may be useful to you. It's not suprising that some folks do well with the advice to be found in 'holy' books. There is justification for just about every possible action and also forgiveness for most any mistake to be found within. If you use your religion that way, just to make yourself feel better about what you do anyway, to justify what your instincts, desires and emotions impel you to do of themselves, then it's not suprising if you do well in life. Natural human nature has served the human race effectively for hundreds of thousands of years. It is the way it is because it works, even lying to yourself and stroking your own ego. Being logical without the defence of scientific scepticism is an unmitigated liability.
  • by node 3 ( 115640 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @06:01PM (#22227504)
    I'm not sure exactly what you are getting at, but:

    But if you believe in equality of outcome (ie. you believe everybody should not have the same chances, but the same amount of money), then you can't believe in motive. So you *have* to believe in means.
    is not true at all in any way whatsoever.

    One does not have to "believe" fully in one idea or another. Sometimes equality of outcome is important, sometimes equality of opportunity is important, sometimes *inequality* is important.

    Sometimes it's the means which matter most, sometimes is the motive. Sometimes it's the ends. Or any combination thereof.

    To take your examples, guns *do* kill people (the literally-minded might chime in that it's the bullet, but pedantry aside, the point stands). People kill people. Both statements are true. Some people with a gun are *more* likely to kill someone. Some people with a gun are *less* likely to kill someone. To take any side of the argument as an absolute (i.e., fundamentalism) is foolish, because it contradicts reality (the key flaw in fundamentalism and extremism).

    Your other example, of the opposition to nuclear power further illuminates this point. There's no single reason behind most things. To elevate one reason above all others is, almost always, counter-productive, because it's counter-reality.

    I don't know exactly what those examples really have to do with what I wrote before, since I stated that equating engineers with terrorists is silly. On the other hand, the apparent tendency towards fundamentalism (not *Islamic* fundamentalism, nor terrorist fundamentalism, just some (often relatively benign) form of fundamentalism, even if it's just emacs vs. vi) among engineer-types is worth looking into. There may be nothing there, but even a cursory familiarity with slashdot gives the impression that there's *something* to the notion.

    Personally, I think it has to do with engineers being very literal-minded (hence all the grammar nazi's and people whose pet peeves are something as silly as when people say, "I could care less"), and also above-average in intelligence (or at least in thoughtfulness), which sort of works off each other leading to strong opinions about the way things should be. For the engineer, the ideals tend to be technical (i.e., which is the best way to write a program, what's the proper way to phrase a sentence, what exactly is the way to measure the Kessel Run, etc.). For the jihadists, the ideals are theological. It seems like fundamentalism is something innate to humans which certain external and internal forces can amplify. It also seems fairly clear that fundamentalism never seems to lead to good ends (except in the very rare cases where a concept truly does appear universally valid, such as with math and physics), so it's worthwhile to study it in situations where it arises, both in its most evil forms, and in its more benign.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @06:57PM (#22228254)
    I couldn't agree more zmooc. As an Arab and a devout Muslim myself that immigrated to the US a long time ago and that currently has degrees in 2 separate disciplines of Engineering, I know what you mean. TBH, uneducated Arabs/Muslims are very business oriented people ONLY. They know how to open businesses and stuff, and many of them know how to make even more money than the locals (well that's true for the Arabs/Muslims that I see here at least) but their lack of education and intellectual openness hinders their integration into open societies! Especially societies with "different" moral values system (such as Holland) and in many cases, makes them very obnoxious people from a native of the land's POV, even if they don't intend to at all.
    This is partially true for many Arab/Muslim Americans here. Most of them don't like the lifestyle (i.e The Drinking, Gambling, Lack of Decency, Broken family Values, teh s3x ...etc), however they love the money and the freedom + political stability, so it's worth it to stay here.

    So they build micro-communities with each other, but integrate in the real society only when it's a must i.e work, business...etc Sadly that is the case for most of us Arabs and Muslims in the states and the west.
    It has nothing to do with Islam. It just depends how open minded you are as an individual and where you come from. For me personally, my religion teaches me many things that are positive especially about diversity and integration, for instance, God states the following in the Quran:

    "O MANKIND WE CREATED YOU FROM A SINGLE (PAIR) OF A MALE AND A FEMALE, AND MADE YOU INTO NATIONS AND TRIBES, THAT YE MAY KNOW EACH OTHER NOT THAT YE MAY DESPISE EACH OTHER. VERILY THE MOST HONORED OF YOU IN THE SIGHT OF GOD IS (HE WHO IS) THE MOST RIGHTEOUS OF YOU. AND GOD HAS FULL KNOWLEDGE AND IS WELL ACQUAINTED (WITH ALL THINGS)."
    Holy Quran 49:13

    Prophet Mohammad teaches that any act that benefits the society and man kind in general is a good religious act regardless of whom it serves. For instance I contribute to many open source software projects as much as I can (I have a degree in CSE), I lecture on Computer related topics for free and to whomever wants to benefit in schools and universities. I see what I do in my free time as not only a communal service that my community would appreciate, but a service that God would reward me for too! The same applies to those Engineers who design equipment that help protect people and save lives..Doctors who develop cures for diseases and so forth. It makes sense.

    In the Quran (can't recall the exact verse), God says to Prophet Mohammad:
    "And we have not sent you BUT only as mercy to all of mankind".

    The translation is a bit rough, however for those who know how to read the Quran well, know that it's the most punctual and precise book ever written in Arabic, nothing is there for no reason. The verse says "mercy to all of mankind" not "mercy to all Muslims!" And surely mercy doesn't mean blowing people up and killing innocent civilians, and when Muslims contributes to a good cause, if it serves the best interest of mankind then it serves God's goals for us as Muslims and vice versa for doing disservices to mankind even if it doesn't hurt Muslims at all.

    People are surprised when they hear such opinions from a Muslim, but believe it or not, it is there in the core of our religion,however if it wasn't for the political-religious nuts we have, then maybe there would have been left a spot in the media on CNN or NBC or what have you for us to say it. But the only news that gets to the spotlight is the destruction this or terrorist that you know the story...

    On a personal note, I just might one day take an extended vacation and visit the Netherlands. Dutch people are awesome (knowing some personally)! I love the culture there, language is real strange but yet so cool, they are so friendly and creative and best of all "Trance Energy" is just such an awesome event and I have yet to witness one in person! It's such a teaser to watch on TV :( Being a lifelong Trance fan maybe the next one I'll be there :D
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @07:53PM (#22228960)
    Well, a few years ago I came across a park with a big outdoor party going on, full of Chinese engineers and engineering students. They seemed to be having a good time, and I thought about walking over to see what it was all about. Then I noticed the big sign saying "Chinese Only!"

    The truth is that the thousands of Chinese students are here for one reason, and one reason only: to pick our brains, and suck all the oxygen out of higher education in the United States (every U.S. student that can't find a spot because a Chinese student took it is to China's advantage.) They have no interest in having anything whatsoever to do with American culture ... well, any that do are probably too afraid to try. So don't expect too much.
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @10:30PM (#22230270)
    No offense, but it seems like you're going for the +5 "All Chinese suck because {insert generalization here}" mod.

    Yeah, I figured someone would take it that way. I'm just commenting on what I've observed, and what people who've been in the grad school system recently have told me. I'm not particularly bigoted (other than that I don't like assholes in general) but let's face a little reality here: China's government is out to extract every ounce of useful information from us. They're doing that by flooding our schools with students. Some are jerks, some are not, sure. But the ones that are just here to get whatever knowledge they need and go home I've found are generally not interested in America or its people. We're at best a distraction.
  • Re:is it April 1? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Wednesday January 30, 2008 @01:56AM (#22231410)
    Huh? Hard-won knowledge should not be for sale to an inimical foreign power, particularly when it comes at the expense of our own people. To give you an example, I know a Ph.D whose degree is in materials science. The materials science curriculum was swamped with Chinese students, somehow a Chinese national managed to get the job of Dean of the school, and he would take year-long sabbaticals to China (paid for by the American taxpayer!) to recruit more Chinese students. There were so many that they were squeezing out all the non-Chinese students.

    This is happening all over the country, my friend. Wake up and smell the coffee ... China is doing a number on us.

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Working...