I just came across this interesting article that states that engineers are more prone to terrorism then other academic backgrounds, because "such people are high achievers and often get sucked into radicalism out of frustration with their corrupt bureaucracies." You can find the article here
The sociologist in this study surveyed 404 militants in 31 countries and found that out of the 178 who had academic backgrounds, the results fell into the following categories:
Engineering: 78
Islamic Studies: 34
Medicine: 14
Economics/Business: 12
The authors said that engineers are typically high achievers who advance by merit, and this could make them more frustrated with the establishment.
I think it is interesting that the sociologists came to this conclusion, but it is important to keep in mind that, according to the article, they defined "engineering" as architecture, all computer related areas, town planning, etc. They have a broader definition of terrorism then the standard "civil, mechanical and electronic engineering" definition that you or I might have.
Interesting study though. I would encourage you to read this article.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
If most of the suicide bombers are university educated then what universities are they attending, what is being taught there? If many of the engineering students are ending up blowing themselves up don’t we need to revise the curriculum a bit? I am curious if the universities that suicide bombers are attending teach them about world politics or are they just a place for people to incite deeper feelings of distain for the world. I read in the book Islam Unveiled by Robert Spencer that most students in the Middle East are studying subjects that directly correlate to Middle East studies; perhaps this narrow field of study is not allowing students a diverse background.
The article didn't say anything about suicide terror, just radicalization. I wonder if this data may exist not because engineers are more susceptible to radicalization, but because engineers are more valuable to terrorist organizations than just about any other group of people. It's likely that Islamists work harder to recruit engineering students than any other demographic, because the payoff would be enormous. It could also be possible that individuals who are already radicalized are going to a university and studying engineering, again because of the subject's obvious value to a terrorist group. The 'engineering mindset' explanation given in the article seems pretty weak, especially in light of other very plausible alternatives.
Root, I think you hit the nail on the head. The article assumes that an engineering degree encourages students to become terrorists, when it is likely the other way around. Isn't it more logical that terrorists are choosing engineering as a degree in order to be more effective at their jobs? It doesn't make much sense for a terrorist to get a law degree or to become a doctor, botanist, oceanographer, or dance instructor, although anything is possible.
Post a Comment