Why can't we have a scientist for a president for a change?

[Cleita]

Why do they always have to be lawyers, businessmen or military types? Why can't we have a scientific mind for a change to put a different perspective on the problems we have that the lawyers, businessmen and military types ignore or have on a low priority?

Surely there has to be a scientist out there with communication and people skills, who is interested in politics. The closest we have come so far is with Dr. Howard Dean. Maybe that's why I was so intrigued with him becoming president. I and many others felt that there was a need for a fresh perspective on things.

[SoCalDem]

1. Scientists deal in FACTS

and probably most of them would not be willing to endure the BULLSHIT necessary to even RUN for office:)

[Cleita]

28. I know. It would be so refreshing to have facts presented to

us for a change instead of spin.

[NNadir]

2. I had hoped Rush Holt in New Jersey would have been appointed to Corzine's

Senate seat, but we didn't get him.

Too bad.

[Dudley_DUright]

27. Rush Holt would make a great senator

and an even better president. He is the anti-Bush in every conceivable way.

[NNadir]

42. Pretty much.

[SeaBob]

3. presidents

a scientist would be good. I would like to see a sculptor or a writer anybody have any other ideas?

[TransitJohn]

7. Yeah

We need a song and dance man in the White House!

[Cleita]

8. I wouldn't mind a writer either. How about a guy like

Bill Moyers? Or, Al Franken is going into politics by running for Congress. He's a writer and as a comedian, that could qualify for an art couldn't it?

We need change!

[BlueJazz]

38. Hi SeaBob..Welcome to DU! n/t

[BillZBubb]

4. Scientists make lousy politicians as a general rule.

We've had several presidents who were engineers and they didn't fare too well.

The things that make science wonderful don't easily translate into public policy which has a large gray area and must deal with emotional issues.

[sam sarrha]

9. politics and science dont mix, science deals only with the facts

[Cleita]

14. Since many scientists are affiliated with universities, they are

very familiar with politics. Universities are hotbeds of politics among administration and faculty.

[sam sarrha]

5. Will a RepugNut Doctor that doesnt believe in Evolution do..

[Cleita]

41. No, that wouldn't be a real scientist, would it?

Don't scientists have to have the approval and acceptance of their fellow scientists to maintain legitimacy?

I really don't know what fellow physcians think of the cat killing guy who diagnosed Terri Schiavo from the Senate floor. I would imagine that they don't hold him in high esteem.

[unblock]

6. yeah, and how about a jewish atheist black lesbian while we're at it?

scientist are too smart to be president.

i mean that in both senses:
a) this country is very anti-intellectual. brains are at best a resource to be exploited, at worst a harbinger of evil.
b) any good scientist knows he's get burned in the oval office even if he ever DID manage to get there.

witness einstein's refusal to become the leader of israel when it was handed to him on a silver platter.

[tocqueville]

10. how can one be jewish, atheist and black at the same time ? nt

[rockymountaindem]

12. Easy

An Ethiopian of Jewish origin who doesn't belive in God but still identifies as a Jew.

Actual belief in God is not required to be a Jew, merely obeying the laws of the Torah and the Oral Law.

[tocqueville]

33. interesting definition

because in that case it's more a definition of citizenship than ethnic background....

[rockymountaindem]

47. Well, Judaism is a religion. Being Jewish means lots of things n/t

[tocqueville]

54. so you mean you can be atheistic religious ? nt

[rockymountaindem]

65. Within the last 150 years, Jews and Judaism have taken on a tripartite

character. The first is the religion. The religion is a set of practices and observances *and* a belief in God. Anybody can become a Jew, but because we do not proselytize, the percentage of converts in the total Jewish population has usually be very low. This means that Jews, who have usually married other Jews, eventually formed their own gene pool.

This gave rise to Jews as an ethnicity, a distinct group with hereditary characteristics and a common gene pool that, for the most part, was closed to outsiders. Nobody really took note of this until about 150 years ago, at which point hatred of Jews moved away from religious grounds and into ethinc ones. This caused us all to think of ourselves as a nation or ethnicity, because it didn't matter if you practiced Judaism the religion, other people (and eventually our own community) would always classify you as a "Jew".

This also gave rise to Jewish culture, and to modern "secular Jews". These are people who are of Jewish ethnic ancestry, and who identify themselves as "Jews" but who don't practice the religion or partake in other community rituals. Yet, being a "Jew" defines part of who they are in some way, much like someone would say "I'm a German" even if their family immigrated to the US in 1880 and they'd never even visited Germany, yet they show up at the Chicago Oktoberfest with all the other German-Americans and talk about being "German".

That's the highly abridged explanation of how one can be Jewish without practicing Judaism. They're kind of different yet the same (if that's not complicated ;) )

Within the religion itself, nowhere is it mandated that we believe in God, simply that we "have no gods before God". Having no belief in God is not specifically forbidden, as Judaism is a religion of acts and not faith.

[immoderate]

19. Hey -- I'm a Jewish atheist.

Though neither black nor lesbian, sorry 'bout that.

--IMM

[rockymountaindem]

11. Einstein was offered the Presidency of Israel

That is only a ceremonial position. Political power in Israel is vested in the Prime Minister and the Knesset.

[Cleita]

13. I have to agree, most scientists and mathematicians for that

matter would rather remain in their ivory towers, but most do have an interest in politics and when I worked at UCLA, I found that the most brilliant minds there were liberals. It seems that their intellect leads them away from conservatism because they analyze everything.

Most of those who are academics are very familiar with the world of politics because most universities are hotbeds of politics, some of it even backstabbing, so I dismiss the fact that they can't do politics.

[unblock]

17. well, yes, there IS politics at universities

but scientists suck at it.

my father is a physicist and has been chairman of his department and also dean of the graduate school. i've heard tons of stories of professors lobbying for one thing or another, backstabbing, etc. trust me, the scientists are rank amateurs when it comes to politics.

just because they play the game doesn't mean they're good at it.

[Cleita]

15. For once I would like someone who keeps his/her religion

or lack of it a private matter.

[Dogmudgeon]

16. We've had several

Most of them, however, were among our early Presidents, as well as the Founders. Adams, Hamilton, Madison and Jefferson all had scientific training and/or careers at one point or another.

Jimmy Carter was a nuclear engineer before he bought his peanut farm. An engineer isn't a scientist per se, but they do need to be trained in scientific reasoning. The same is true of physicians -- they aren't formally trained in science, but they have to be able to draw conclusions based on scientific procedures. MD/PhDs and PhD Engineers, of course, ARE trained scientists. And many military people are trained in engineering subspecialties, as was Carter as a Naval officer.

Herbert Hoover and Theodore Roosevelt also studied engineering.

We should avoid becoming too entranced with science, too. After all, Bill Frist is a physician, too. The GOP also once courted Edward Teller to run for some legislative position. But you're absolutely correct with your primary argument -- we need some different kinds of people in Washington beyond lawyers, military, and business leaders. And, lately, athletes, most of whom really ARE turning out to be boneheaded Republicans (Jack Kemp, Jim Bunning, Lynn Swann, and of course Der Gröpinator.)

--p!

[Ilsa]

22. Wes Clark studied Philosophy along w/ economics at Oxford, IIRC. nt

[DanCa]

24. Plus he speaks several languages. (nt)

[pinto]

18. Gore is the closest we've come in a long time. Would have been interesting

[Egalitariat]

20. Do you mean Al Gore, Sr? Al Gore is a government major and a career

politician. Do you mean political science?

[pinto]

25. I mean Al Gore. Understand he's not a scientist, but his grasp of

environmental issues, and the science behind the political debate, has always made him stand out in Washington, imo.

[TahitiNut]

21. Well, as a former "Senior Research Scientist," I'll say ...

... no whey, hose 'A'! (Yes, that was what my business card and personnel file said.) I can't begin to count the number of times I had to resist pressure to "spin" the results of an empirical analysis for 'political' reasons. There's something in my core that abhors the twisting of objective information to make it more 'palatable.' Perhaps it's the constant effort to comprehend and grapple with the inherent "fuzz" that already exists in any objective study, and the discipline of fairly presenting that ambiguity in an honest and candid fashion. The notion that there are 'hard' results and precise findings in science is nonsense - absolutely everything has inherent "fuzz" including the numerical methods. The study of Numerical Methods itself, a core discipline in nearly all science, is the devotion to minimizing error and ambiguity resulting from the observation and measurement itself. I think even a mediocre scientist constantly grapples with eliminating his own bias. To fight against that and then pander to the bias of others seems to be ethically masochistic to me.

[Cleita]

26. Interesting perspective you have there.

And yes, I found what you said out in math. When I took Algebra in high school back in the fifties, it was all cut and dried. I took a refresher course in night school twenty years later, which I needed for my accounting courses, and found myself dealing with imaginary numbers and set theory. Nothing was cut and dried anymore. I don't even want to know what's going on today.

[burrowowl]

55. In HS algebra

even in 1962, we had imaginary numbers. The square root of -1. I'm sure you had quadriatic equations involving imaginaries.

[Cleita]

59. My HS algebra was in 1954. I had quadratic equations, no

imaginary numbers, no graphs either. That was a big shock as well. Like I said all very cut and dried in 1954. I also went to an all girls school and they didn't think math was that important for us. They offered the course to meet college entrance requirements for those of us who had those aspirations. When I started college in 1958 I was very behind, for science classes, but the boys helped me. I got through the chemistry, barely, but no imaginary numbers either. We also didn't have calculators back then. We had to use slide rules.

[burrowowl]

64. I went to an all girls school too

When Yale went co-ed, one of our girls was offered a scholarship.
Imaginary numbers are very much a part of quadriatic equations: imaginary numbers very important for catenaries or how will your suspended bridge hold up.

[Cleita]

66. Well, I wasn't taught that.

The quadratic equations from what I remember made you solve ab, ac, bc, equals X or something like that. I don't ever remember imaginary numbers then and I found them a surprise when I had to use them the second time I had to do that kind of math.

Oh in my little rural high school, there were only 49 of us in the graduating class. None of us were offered scholarships to Yale and only one to a local college in Los Angeles. Eight of us were pregnant (not me) and soon to be married right after graduation.

Different world.

[TahitiNut]

67. Well, as a Math undergrad and CompSci grad ... I have to say

... that math is the descriptive tool - an abstraction of the observable phenomena. Not until upper division math is 'fuzz' even close to adequately dealt with. Nonetheless, we're not really dealing with the same kind of 'fuzz' that experimentalists deal with in the material and earth sciences, since we're never dealing with the kind of pristine 'universe' that various (math) spaces describe. Errata are the multitudinous demons of the real world - and 'assumptions' are the rites of exorcism. Make sense? Any attachment to belief (the parallax of obtuse perspectives) must be a very stretchy, long rubber band to maintain intellectual integrity. On top of that is the third (probabilistic) kind of 'fuzz' - where it's almost always Halloween. Megaquarky - it's where the insane run to play, too.

[Cleita]

68. I had a friend once who was a professor of Math at a

prestigious university. He told me that he and his colleagues didn't deal with numbers anymore that it was all symbols, or that was my understanding... before everyone jumps on me. He is now a Dean although I haven't spoken to him in forty years.

However, he did make the distinction that arithmetic involved numbers and math didn't. Now was he pompous? I don't know because I never breathed the same etheric air that he and his colleagues did.

[TahitiNut]

71. I've gotten over correcting people when they talk about 'math' ...

... as a course in elementary school. It's a distinction only us mathtards make, I think. "Pompous"? I guess so. I think of it as more like "Post Traumatic Learning Disorder." (Being a somewhat kinesthetic/visual learner, upper division math bent my brain into knots. Ouch!)

[Cleita]

72. LOL.

Ouch! Me too! I didn't have to learn anything, either!

[kestrel91316]

23. Why not?

Ummm, maybe because science isn't biblical???

Just speculating here..........

[AnnieBW]

29. Some Suggestions

Vint Cerf or Lawrence Lessig (both Internet gurus). Barring them, Al Gore has done a lot of work on global warming. And don't forget, Jimmy Carter was trained as an engineer.

[Doctor_J]

30. There is a violent anti-intellectualism in this country

just as there was in Nazi Germany. HAte radio has people believing that have an idiot in the WH is preferable to having someone with an education.

[left of center]

34. You are right there!

The right wing has been politicizing science for decades. To be sure, the left wing is guilty as well, but not to near the degree as the right.

It is getting down right scary when results and conclusions are suspect because they fail to pass a political-religious-economic litmus test. I'm thinking a lot of this is the right wing projecting themselves into what they encounter. Of couse, they expect a scientist to manufacture or cherry pick data in support of an agenda, because that is what they would do if they were sicentists.

For that matter, that is exactly what some industry "scientists" do.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

31. How Would Being A Scientist Make One A Better Leader Of A Country Though?

I don't understand that part. I love science and respect the hell out of scientists but I fail to see how being one makes one a better President. There are a lot of traits that are necessary to be a great leader, but I'm not sure being affluent in science, though it couldn't hurt, is one of them.

[Cleita]

37. Well, there's perspectives that have been missing in our

presidents of the last fifty years, because they view their office through the lens of legalities and military. So, the way we do things in public works gets filtered through those lens.

Like when I was a forest dweller, our business minded Presidents saw the need to balance the needs of the workers against the needs of the lumber companies. Environmental concerns were minor.

I believe a scientist would be concerned about the pollution of streams and other waterways, the destruction of eco-systems, and chemical pollution becauseit affects both the workers and the industry as well.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

56. Maybe they would be more concerned, but that's the least of what is

important in being president in my opinion. I don't think a president needs to be a scientist in order to be responsible environmentally and care about those issues. But there are far more complex things one needs to know to be a superior president that being a scientist just doesn't take care of.

From what I've taken from your post, being a scientist makes no difference whatsoever, you are just asking that a president care about environmental policies. Fair enough. But he needs to have a lot more to him than just that.

[left of center]

32. It seems that personal qualities that make one a good scientist..

or a good politician are seldom found in the same person.

[Cleita]

35. Surely, in this whole country, there has to be one?

Funny, I always thought Carl Sagan would make a good leader. Even though his own fellow scientists derided him as a populist, I thought this was his strong point, the ability to reach out to people other than scientists and put things in a way they could understand.

[left of center]

39. Sagan would be one.

I have read most of his books. In fact, I'm finishing up Broca's Brain.

Sagan brought science out from the Ivory Tower to the masses. He not only helped them understand it as a method, he also fired their imaginations.

A populist? Guilty as charged, but a scientist nonetheless!

[Cleita]

40. I thought it was pretty guache for his own community to

turn on him that way, just because he was able to spread his wings.

[Booster]

36. Compared to what we have now, how about a ground squirrel, or

at least a human whose IQ is more than his or her belt size. We have lowered the bar just about to the ground, so we're going to think the next person is a damn genius, whoever it happens to be.

[eppur_se_muova]

43. Or a President who listens to (capable, nonideological) Science Advisor?

Eisenhower was actually described as "adoring his scientists". He was probably about the best President we could have had when Sputnik was launched and caused such a panicked reaction. JFK, Nixon, and Carter were also good about facing the reality that advances in science were profoundly changing the world.

We certainly need someone who can *deal* with science better than Ray-gun and Bush**. Of course Gore would have been great -- I saw him interacting with a panel on ozone depletion and his questions would not have been out of place at a university colloquium (and I attended a colloquium by Mario Molino, who shared a Nobel Prize for work on the atmospheric chemistry of CFC-induced ozone depletion).

I agree with the other posters above that a scientist would not necessarily make a good President. Scientists are to used to dealing with facts, and not motivations. Remember "Nature does not lie" and "God is subtle, but He is never malicious" (Einstein). Politicians have to deal with lying and malice all the time, and need to be skilled at identifying one or the other, with little room for error. I remember pseudo-science debunker James Randy ("the Amazing Randi") stated that scientists are some of the easiest witnesses to fool, because they are expecting logically consistent results, not clever deception.

Bear in mind I'm a scientist myself, and would like to see scientific issues dealt with better in gov't. I don't think that requires a scientist as president.

(FWIW, Sadi Carnot, a chemist, was once President of France. I believe Paderewski, the pianist, became PM of Poland.)

on edit: LBJ had a degree in education from Southwest Texas State Teachers' College. He served as a school principal for a year, and also taught debate and (IIRC) elocution. He took his high school debate team from nowhere to the state finals in one school year. He got into politics by serving as secretary to a Texas representative, and virtually taking over his office.

[CornField]

44. How would a scientist end his/her speeches?

The nation might collapse if something other than "God Bless America" was used.

[upi402]

45. CARTER -Physicist

no?
Naval officer too

[upi402]

49. Jimmy Carter -actually a Nuclear Physicist

and an Naval Officer on a nuclear submarine

[SPKrazy]

61. Don't think he's a nuclear physicist

but he was an engineer on a nuclear sub

from wikipedia:

He attended Georgia Southwestern College and Georgia Institute of Technology, and received a B.S. degree from the United States Naval Academy in 1946, the same year he married Rosalynn Smith. Carter was a gifted student, and finished 59th out of his Academy class of 820. Vietnam POW and war hero, Jeremiah Denton, was one of Carter's classmates. They are considered members of the class of 1947, as their class would have graduated in 1947, except that the program had been temporarily compressed. Carter did post-graduate work, studying nuclear physics and reactor technology at Union College.

Carter served on submarines in the Atlantic and Pacific fleets. He was later selected by Admiral Hyman G. Rickover for the U.S. Navy's nuclear submarine program, where he became a qualified nuclear engineer. Rickover was a demanding officer, and Carter was greatly influenced by him. Carter later said that next to his parents, Admiral Rickover had had the greatest influence on him. There was a story he often told of being interviewed by the Admiral. He was asked about his rank in his class at the Naval Academy. Carter said "Sir, I graduated 59th out of a class of 820". Rickover only asked "Did you always do your best?" Carter was forced to admit he had not, and the Admiral asked why. Carter later used this as the theme of his presidential campaign, and as the title of his first book, "Why Not The Best?" He even mentioned Admiral Rickover in his inaugural address. Carter loved the Navy, and had planned to make it his career. His ultimate goal was to become Chief of Naval Operations.

[TahitiNut]

73. Yep. Nuclear Engineer in the infancy of that art.

:shrug: Good man. His "Nucular" Engineering background is much of what invited the attacks of "too detail-oriented" and "focused on minutiae" that he got from the right. (That's what happens when they get facts recited to them to counter their spin.)

[Wafture]

46. Famous people who are also engineers

JIMMY CARTER

Nuclear Engineer and Former President of the United States

Carter began his career as a naval engineer after receiving a B.S. degree from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1946. In 1950 the navy decided to build its first ship since the end of World War II and Lt. Carter, who had become a submariner, was assigned to represent the navy with the precommissioning engineering for a new type of submarine. After the navy decided to build two nuclear submarines, he was selected for this service. He was assigned first to the Atomic Energy Commission in Washington, D.C, then to Schenectady, N.Y. as senior officer of the crew of the "Sea Wolf," which was under construction. He took graduate work from Union College in reactor technology and nuclear physics, supervised the training of the crew, and assisted with the construction of the power plant.

http://www.engology.com/engpg5ajimmycarter.htm



Jimmy Carter - 39th President of the United States.

Attended Georgia Southwestern College and the Georgia Institute of Technology and received a B.S. degree from the United States Naval Academy in 1946. In the Navy he became a submariner, serving in both the Atlantic and Pacific fleets and rising to the rank of lieutenant. Chosen by Admiral Hyman Rickover for the nuclear submarine program, he was assigned to Schenectady, N.Y., where he took graduate work at Union College in reactor technology and nuclear physics and served as senior officer of the pre-commissioning crew of the Seawolf.

http://www.engineeringk12.org/students/fun_section/famous_engineers.htm

[liontamer]

48. speaking as a scientist

working in politics seems crappy. I'm interested in politics and i have decent communication and people skills, but politics is just not a field I would really want to get involved in. I don't like the compromise necessary for success. However, you do have a lot of scientists who are willing to work as consultants and advisors. You just need a president who is willing to get an outside opinion.

[Cleita]

50. That would be getting warmer. It's that I'm fed up with

my country being led by businessmen and lawyers mostly, who are limited in their views. I want change, a different perspective in how to deal with problems. Maybe one scientist would be willing to run the gauntlet to save their nation. Then he/she could hire the consultant lawyers and business people for advice.

[Hardrada]

60. Calling Dr. Strangelove!

[SPKrazy]

62. Saw That Again Last Night n/t

[burrowowl]

51. We did

Jimmy Carter, degree in Nuclear Physics, installed solar panels on the White House. One of Raygun's first acts was to take them down.
Had we followed his engery policy, we probably wouldn't be where we are at now.

Edited to state that Herbert Hoover was a geologist. He advised his wife and Latin teacher on the translation of Agricola's De Re Metallica (a Renaissance technical manual on mining) and when we did some mining archeaology in Alsace-Lorraine, found out he was wrong about the depths reached by Renaissance miners, being a man of his times, he couldn't believe that they could have gone that far.

[Cleita]

52. So we need a new Jimmy Carter or the original.

He can run for office again. On edit: excuse me for being an idiot, but I never knew until now that he was a nuclear physicist. Why oh why, was he pushed as a peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia? Why oh why was he touted for his Christianity?

I knew people back then, who decided to vote for Reagan because they thought Carter wa a backwards rural type. If they had known he was a nuclear physicist they would have voted for him assuming he was having setbacks. I did vote for Jimmy the second time around because I couldn't stand Reagan. He was my guv'nor once you know.

After Jimmy left office I so admired him and his work, but damn I never knew he was a nuclear physicist.

[SPKrazy]

63. Not a nuclear physicist

see post #61

Did do some graduate work in nuclear physics, and I guess that is still more of a scientist than we've had any time recently

[radio4progressives]

53. i don't want no scientist for president, thanks just the same..

i'll take a civil liberties attorney right about now, in fact how about yesterday.

[Cappadonna]

57. Scientists and Engineers have to be smart , and America hate Smart People

The two last democratic presidents were well educated men-- Clinton was a briliant lawyer and Carter was a nuclear engineer. And for the most part, Americans hated them. (Okay, everyone, even most of his critics, liked Clinton, but how couldn't you like the guy?) As someone pointed out, scientists are seen as aloof weirdos who are the second seal of the Apocalypse.

And scientists and intellectuals don't deal well in politics. Why? Because they exist in an intellectual echo chamber and who would have to learn to speak and work with people who main specialty is being loud and obnoxious. Its what happens to alot of CTOs and CIOs -- they have to explain simply technical ideas to business people as if they were retards.

Look at how we all hem and hawed at Al Gore's geeky ideas, and he's more of a hobbyist nerd. Could you imagine if a real nerd like Bill Gates or Carl Sagan got into politics? They would be written off as know-it-alls and drummed out of office. Never mind the fact that most Americans are know-nothings.

[SPKrazy]

58. There's Always Bill Frist!

:sarcasm: :puke: B-)

[OzarkDem]

69. I'll settle for a doctor - Dean

He's the best of both worlds.

[Cleita]

70. Oh yes and so many would have settled for him.

When I was stumping for Kerry in the last election, I ran into so many Democrats who asked me why I wasn't for Dean, their choice. I had to tell them he was my choice as well but not the Democratic candidate by then. I had to tell them that they had to vote for Kerry against Bush, but my heart was with Dean too.

[MaraJade]

74. We got close . . .

He had little head for politics but Jimmy Carter was an expert in Nuclear Physics, having worked on the development of Nuclear Propulsion for Submarines during his military days.

I must agree with you on this one, especially since we are now seeing the effects of global warming. A scientist might be of help. . .