At what point would you consider yourself a Scientist?

As the title asks, at what point educationally would you say someone should be considered a scientist? Is it when they are awarded a PhD within the discipline or when they get a BSc or simply when you're conducting your own experiment for self discovery.

What do you think personally?

Reply 1

username2110825

6

Original post by CTLevers

As the title asks, at what point educationally would you say someone should be considered a scientist? Is it when they are awarded a PhD within the discipline or when they get a BSc or simply when you're conducting your own experiment for self discovery.

What do you think personally?

Not sure about Bio/chem, but I know Physics specifically requires a Master's to be a Chartered Physicist. So...I guess Master's?

Reply 2

S2M

22

Original post by CTLevers

As the title asks, at what point educationally would you say someone should be considered a scientist? Is it when they are awarded a PhD within the discipline or when they get a BSc or simply when you're conducting your own experiment for self discovery.

What do you think personally?

I'd say at least at an MSc level.

Reply 3

Emily.97

21

when i write down a hypothesisssssss

Reply 4

CTLeafez

OP

22

Original post by S2M

I'd say at least at an MSc level.

I'd say you're a scientist after BSc level. You are after all a Bachelor of Science, but I guess at MSc level you are more experienced in research methodology rather than just learning the facts.

Reply 5

username2752874

22

Original post by CTLevers

As the title asks, at what point educationally would you say someone should be considered a scientist? Is it when they are awarded a PhD within the discipline or when they get a BSc or simply when you're conducting your own experiment for self discovery.

What do you think personally?

According to bigwig scientists on Quora (which like a more academic and mature version of Reddit), they consider one a scientist after they've graduated with a PhD.

Reply 6

username2752874

22

Original post by CTLevers

I'd say you're a scientist after BSc level. You are after all a Bachelor of Science, but I guess at MSc level you are more experienced in research methodology rather than just learning the facts.

MSc degrees can be entirely taught with no research, it varies heavily by subject and uni

Reply 7

RickshawCowboy

3

I'd say once a person starts to practise science rather than simply study it. Being a scientist is a career. Somebody with an degree in accounting isn't an accountant unless they're employed as one, right?

Reply 8

Das Kapital

2

Definitely PhD. I'm doing a physics degree and there's no way I consider myself a scientist.

Reply 9

hezzlington

20

I'd say if you're conducting original research then, that's the point you can maybe consider yourself a scientist? Perhaps MSc/mres material, definitely phd and post doc level.

Like somebody above said, MSc could be entirely taught and your project/dissertation not particularly original.

I'm still undergrad, and I'm doing 'original' research and if I make enough progress and I can do something with my data; I've been invited to co author a paper over summer after I graduate with my lecturer.

Having said that, I still don't feel like a scientist. I just don't know enough. I'd agree with the above guys saying that you're a scientist when you're doing it for a living, or at least regularly practicing outside of the normal scope of just trying to pass exams.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 10

CTLeafez

OP

22

[QUOTE=hezzlington;70063816. I'd agree with the above guys saying that you're a scientist when you're doing it for a living, or at least regularly practicing outside of the normal scope of just trying to pass exams.

I agree but being devil's advocate, would you say scientists who have retired and no longer conduct original research themselves and therefore no longer technically employed as a scientist, lose the "title"?

Reply 11

RayApparently

21

I think if you've got your Masters and you're studying for your PhD then you're probably a 'scientist'. It depends though - you can be more accomplished and competent than someone who's more qualified than you on paper.

Reply 12

hezzlington

20

Original post by CTLevers

I agree but being devil's advocate, would you say scientists who have retired and no longer conduct original research themselves and therefore no longer technically employed as a scientist, lose the "title"?

Yeah I guess so :dontknow:

If I retired from a career in academia/science, I'd say "I was a scientist".

Reply 13

username2110825

6

Wait, so you mean having a BA in Japanese DOESN'T make me Japanese? :moon:

Reply 14

username1221160

19

I would say someone engaged in research.

The problem with using a PhD as a requirement is it would exclude say the lab manager with considerable scientific expertise, several decades of experience and with their name on a few dozen papers.

Reply 15

EternalLight

2

When you're doing new research or contributing to existing research to advance the field.

Reply 16

S2M

22

Original post by CTLevers

I'd say you're a scientist after BSc level. You are after all a Bachelor of Science, but I guess at MSc level you are more experienced in research methodology rather than just learning the facts.