English major here. Leader of a tech team at a leading company.
Derrida and David Foster Wallace were technically more challenging to my intelligence than what I do now. Don't get me wrong, I love my job, and it is not easy! But it is pretty entertaining (bordering on insulting) to see engineers huff and gruff that no one but engineers can be engineers. There's this weird rift in the developer world where only CS degrees are respected or only wunderkinds who dropped out of high school in their freshman year at a prestigious university are real engineers and everyone else is unworthy of the title. I suppose it is partly because it is a threat to the specialization of engineers (how can someone four years behind me be as good: impossible!). In my experience, however, some of the best people I have worked with are doing something other than what their degree is in because they are curious people who are passionate about lots of things and picked one in college because they had to for the sake of a major. Lots of people happen to be good with both sides of their brain.
It is sad that degrees have become 'character classes'. I think people lose perspective that a degree is at worst a piece of paper describing what you may have been studying for a very brief part of your life.
It cuts both ways too. It's laughable that an English literature degree would somehow make you more empathetic than an electronics student.
I have a poli sci degree, about two years of CS at a community college. I am a techincal lead at post acquisition company, I started with them as an unpaid intern when the founders worked out of an apartment.
Agree 100% about "curious people who are passionate". Interviewing people that have engineering degrees, I find a lot of people I could describe as bored or not curious. Sure it's not the case for everyone, but I think an engineer without an engineering degree is naturally going to be more prone to learn outside of their job. A lot of people with CS degrees seem to think the learning part of their job is done.
The idea that "liberal arts are easy" comes from the grade inflation in many universities (specifically, the differential of inflation between LA and STEM) which actually gives misleading signals about peoples' chances in the job market. It's a lot harder to get a writing job than an entry-level programming job. If the grades were better market signals, English and history courses would be giving a lot more B's and C's, and people would stop thinking "I can't do math" after working their asses off for a B+.
"English majors" is a pretty wide-reaching group. You have really intelligent people who are passionate about deep analysis of literature, and you have people who just felt like majoring in liberal arts because they're lazy and "science is hard". Anecdotally, I have a good friend with a BA in English Lit who's now doing Rails dev at an early-stage startup (and doing a pretty bang-up job, from what I hear).
I'm willing to buy that, statistically speaking, more people who major in computer science or math will become good developers than people who major in the humanities, but that's fairly obvious: what you major in is a decent indicator of what you're interested in. Sure, not every English major who learns to code will become a rockstar ninja guru, but that's true of STEM students as well. Unless you can prove otherwise, there's no reason to believe that there's something inherent about majoring in English that inhibits the sort of analytic mindset that engineering requires.
From personal experience, yes. (I am not, but I know a few). When they are good, they tend to be damn good.
There is a selection bias going on though. If you are a mediocre programmer with a CS degree, you can present yourself as a programmer with little delusion. However if you are, say, an English major programmer, chances are you won't advertise yourself as a programmer unless you really are the best sort of natural.
Skilled learned in an English program certainly may help, but all of the English major programmers that I know have always been programmers. They are naturals, have known it since at least early highschool, and picked their major despite that.
Years ago, on a tour of public K-12 schools, a principle asked me why software developers were such bad writers.
I said "au contraire", all the great developers I know are also great writers. In fact, if a person can't write well, I believe they probably can't code well either. I explained to the tour group that programming is just like writing an essay. Organize your thoughts, logical, clarity, etc.
Some of the best developers I've worked with come from outside tech. Ballet dancer, bus driver, EE, historian.
Because I value communication, intuition, and creativity, I get a little worried when a team only has CS nerds and script kiddies.
I don't like these "so and so proven to be a great coder" type articles. Who cares what you have previously studied or worked with? Sure some skills can carry over, but with training any competent person can be a developer. We may not all be the equivalent of Vonnegut(well, English-studying folks), but then again not everyone needs to write an OS kernel for that matter. If you're a great developer there's a reason for that; you're intelligent and have a strong understanding. Understanding concepts can be learned over time, intelligence can't.
Can Computer Science majors be good writers? Can Math majors be good politicians?
I've met philosophy majors, english majors, biology majors, comp sci majors, and even people with no university level education - all were good even great coders. I majored in History and yet have done quite well as a software developer.
I took 2 years of Computer science - it was 2 years of wasted drivel that has helped me solve ZERO real world problems. Also, I hate math. Surprise, you don't need math to code. You need to solve problems at an applied level to be a successful coder - ANY intelligent person can do this if they enjoy actually using coding tools.
Anecdotal it may be, but I've never seen any advantage to hiring or working with Comp Sci grads over other disciplines. So yes, English Majors CAN be good developers.
> I majored in History and yet have done quite well as a software developer.
I prefer to hire history majors[1] as developers. They tend to do well at holding complex systems in their heads, understanding them, and explaining them.
1. Ideally history plus some kind of engineering, where engineering is defined as design, building, and use of practical engines, machines, systems, or structures. Biology can fit this definition, but not, say, sports marketing.
Most programmers gravitate towards programming because they is some aspect of programming that inherently interests them. I have about a dozen friends that I've tried to convince to learn how to program, even something as simple as Excel formulas, and they just weren't interested.
Most people won't find sitting in front of a computer day after day interesting. It takes a certain mindset to get comfortable writing and organizing things in your head an on a screen.
There is something to be said about the analogy to writing, however. When I code, I always feel like I'm trying to tell a story, and my goal is to make it easier for the next person who reads my code (likely me) to understand what I was trying to do. If it's too byzantine and "clever", and I have to sit there and think about what I was trying to do, then I'm doing something wrong.
Successful English major/developer here from the first boom. I'd say there's some natural advantages to English majors (aside from the "whatever degree" people who just wanted to graduate) because reading and writing require a lot of the same deep concentration as programming. It also gives them a natural advantage in communication, via documentation or just explaining their line of reasoning. It might be different now, but in 1999 there weren't many colleges teaching HTML and web development, so everyone was learning this stuff on their own anyway. In general, I've found people from liberal arts backgrounds have a more well-rounded approach and (maybe because of survivorship bias) they are not as narrowly-focused as most Computer Science -> web developers.
Totally agree (also a successful English major / developer from the first boom).
A lot of what fascinated me was the underlying grammar and syntax of language and how, if you knew how to manipulate those symbols ("words") through the use of an appropriate tool (diagrams, but not the ones you remember from when you were a kid learning to write sentences) you could manipulate sentences almost like they were tree-structures - without changing the meaning.
That said, to _succeed_ as a developer, I felt compelled to go out and get a Master's in Information Systems ... but that was about career success (nobody wanted an English Major to be their IT Project Manager, for some reason).
I have a BA in English literature. I'm not a developer, but hope to be eventually. Anyway, the question is ridiculous. One may as well ask, "Can programmers read a book and write a pithy criticism on it (grounded in some school of literary criticism)?"
I have a dual degree in Computer Science and Philosophy[1] (graduated 2010).
In every interview I had people pointed to the Philosophy part of my degree as a quaint curiousity and asked about it. I told of how I love writing and debate, and I think that effective communication is one of the most important and understated concepts in every scientific profession.
I love Computer Science but I really love writing and ethics[2] and conversation. I love communication and the art (and science) of effectively conveying ideas. I'd probably love advertising, to be honest.
If I had to do college all over again I'd probably try to do English/Philosophy/CS, with perhaps CS as the minor. I have enormous respect for liberal arts majors, but more-so than other majors, and I think this is very important, the value of humanities degrees are very much what you put into them. It didn't seem hard in my school at least to get a Phil/Communications/English degree compared to a STEM degree, but that in itself only meant that what you got out of a humanities degree was entirely based on your input, and there was a lot of input to be had. I definitely found humanities majors vastly more socially capable than the engineer majors, almost to an embarrassing degree.[3]
Anyway I do think that CS and any communication/writing-intensive major compliment each other grandly. It seems only natural, especially with the intersection of logic in Philosophy or clear composition in English. But I also think these majors compliment CS because I think the largest deficiency in every other CS and engineering grad I've met is that they have a hard time communicating their ideas and debating others effectively. English and Philosophy (and any writing in general) help with that. A lot, in my opinion.
I had 12 years of Catholic Schooling and they stressed the hell out of essay writing. Composition composition composition. Looking back, I feel that was a really important thing, and it made all of us better people, in terms of relating and communicating.
In fact, and I think this is the most important takeaway from my silly ramblings here, I think that writing and writing a lot makes you more a more empathetic person. I think that the more you have to put down your ideas to explain or persuade other people in a medium that you can look back on, the more you will have to consider and understand other points of view. Doubly so if you are required to write about topics that you may not be fanatic about. Anyone can write an argument about why, say, PHP sucks (or not) without getting much out of it for themselves, since they are just puking their zeal onto paper (or pixels) and probably don't give all too much thought to really convincing people. But having to consider things that you aren't already a true believer in takes a lot of nuance and brain-turning. I think, anyway.
[2] in the Aristotelian/Kant/Mill/Humanity's greater good/etc sense of the word, not the vague-ideas-gotten-by-parents-and-peers sense which is usually picked up on (see for instance almost the entire abortion debate)
[3] I'm quite the introvert and it took me a long time to overcome the social interaction thing that seemed to plague so many of my peers in college. I was supremely shy as a kid and tended to hide behind my mom whenever we went somewhere. My 8th grade class was just 21 people (two groups of 10 and 11), and my high school was just 500-600 people. Going in to college I was unused to, well, interaction.
In my freshman year of college it all hit me. My college (RPI) was known for being an introverted place and I met so many great people who almost literally never left their rooms. Great minds and personalities who were self-sequestered from the world.
It felt tragic sometimes. I met and found a lot of people wanted to meet people but had a great fear of simply being in public spaces more and exchanging pleasantries. Others still, and this was not an uncommon opinion, would disparage the idea of small talk as useless. It's funny but, of all places, once I came to college and met enough varied and amazing people I became vastly, vastly less shy. It just wasn't worth it to be shy when there were so many great people to meet.
Studied poli sci in college ('07), now I work in tech/marketing -- People always joke about it being a mismatch ("how did you end up there?!") and I normally make a comment about getting lost on the way to law school, but truthfully, it has actually been a great compliment to where I'm at now with how much focus it had on debate, writing and psychology (I focused heavily on public policy).
Interestingly, I know of plenty of English majors that could ace a class in boolean logic or set theory...both core underpinnings of good developers. They understand that words and symbols have very distinct meanings, which is surprisingly lacking in a lot of professional developers that I know.
I do not come from an English background, nor an engineering/CS background...and while I am not a developer (I do code, but not full time), I can lead a team of developers just fine within my area of expertise. I wouldn't hesitate to put an English major with moderate coding skills on a team that was tasked with Natural Language Processing.
Why CS is being stereotyped? My wife is an English Major and now she is learning to code. She does have some issues in the beginning but with time she is getting better and better. She told me recently that how tough was some concepts when she started but with practice she is able to grasp them and now she is confident.
Will she face fierce competition in the the job market which will put her against some of the people with CS major background? Absolutely. But she is all prepared to explain to her interviewer the passion for her to pursue programming as a career.
If someone is good at maths and science from the very beginning then the chances are that they will end up pursuing there career in Tech. What I call "By chance". But for some other people who are taking this audacious decision to enter the field of programming/tech irrespective of their background are the people who I call "By choice".
And according to me people who are entering this amazing field of CS/Programming/Tech by choice should be respected and supported.
When I started back in the day before there were any computer science majors, I was surprised by the large number of musicians in the profession. There was something about music and programming that clicked together. If you remember the Los Altos Hills Marching Band, they were mostly programmers, although they were known more for their humor than their music.
In my opinion, writing good software is less like writing (the analogy of copy-and-paste holds to coding as well as writing) and more like weaving. Writing, at least, in the chapter format, isn't tightly coupled in terms of chapters as program modules. Yes, most books have an overarching plot - but how many programs are stories? They are more like buildings. The infrastructure (HVAC, electrical) must be in place before building floors. Floors can vary and be isolated. The building as a whole serves a business purpose. Oh and make sure your critical infrastructure cannot be flooded (Sandy). Tiny Towers - FTW!
With weaving, you have to be attuned as the whole structure of the cloth before you start writing. You need to see the big picture and concentrate on the details.
Yes, there is no equivalent refactoring tool like an IDE for weaving but I belabor my point..
I'm not Sean Lindsay so I can't speak for him, but I remember the first bubble and his phrase resonated with me, and not because 'english majors aren't good developers'. I don't think that is what he meant by it.
The first bubble was about 'boots on the ground' and an extremly limited pool of talent. I was getting calls to move to New York, California, Chicago... because I KNEW JAVASCRIPT. There was no stack-exchange, no learning blogs and most information was still gathered through purchasing the O'Reilly on X or submitting a question to X's newsgroup.
So the phrase "how many English majors on your dev team?" really just meant (IMHO) "How many people do you have that really don't know what they are doing"... I don't think reading that phrase in today's bubble scenario makes as much sense as it did twelve years ago.
If being a good developer was only related to technical skills and background, hiring would sure be a lot easier.
One of the best developers I know was an English major. He's even more amazing as a leader. He now leads a large team of engineers and I hope to someday get the chance to work with him again.
As an electrical engineer teaching himself to code, I found programming to be a lot more comparable to writing than engineering. Coding is at the same time a logical and creative process, and a lot like juggling how pieces of an essay or story fit together to a chosen goal for your audience. Engineering seems a lot more rigid - you have a set problem and a known best practice solution. In that sense it is more like solving a list of math problems. Yes I know the best math (and engineering) problems require creativity and an intuitive feel, but by and large that kind of work is only available to the top of the field. But, you can code and write whatever you like and ship it at zero cost.
I believe that they can. I grew up on computers and interested in science. I also loved books and read every possible minute of every day. I first majored in Biology and after my first year realized that I had hardly read any books. I felt empty. I added English Literature as a double major; doing both was tough but worth it. I never stopped hacking on the side and eventually started my first computer company in college. I have been developing ever since. I am now a CTO and I believe that the mix of science and arts helps me do my job as a people and technical leader. Also the former CTO and now CEO of Etsy Chad Dickerson was an Engligh Lit major as well.
Flawless grammar and the ability to reason about abstract things like linguistics, historical context and an author's intention are obviously easily transferable skills.
I would expect cult behavior from certain kinds of developers however.
[+] [-] timfrietas|13 years ago|reply
Derrida and David Foster Wallace were technically more challenging to my intelligence than what I do now. Don't get me wrong, I love my job, and it is not easy! But it is pretty entertaining (bordering on insulting) to see engineers huff and gruff that no one but engineers can be engineers. There's this weird rift in the developer world where only CS degrees are respected or only wunderkinds who dropped out of high school in their freshman year at a prestigious university are real engineers and everyone else is unworthy of the title. I suppose it is partly because it is a threat to the specialization of engineers (how can someone four years behind me be as good: impossible!). In my experience, however, some of the best people I have worked with are doing something other than what their degree is in because they are curious people who are passionate about lots of things and picked one in college because they had to for the sake of a major. Lots of people happen to be good with both sides of their brain.
[+] [-] edderly|13 years ago|reply
It cuts both ways too. It's laughable that an English literature degree would somehow make you more empathetic than an electronics student.
[+] [-] alexbell|13 years ago|reply
Agree 100% about "curious people who are passionate". Interviewing people that have engineering degrees, I find a lot of people I could describe as bored or not curious. Sure it's not the case for everyone, but I think an engineer without an engineering degree is naturally going to be more prone to learn outside of their job. A lot of people with CS degrees seem to think the learning part of their job is done.
[+] [-] fratis|13 years ago|reply
;)
[+] [-] michaelochurch|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lazerwalker|13 years ago|reply
I'm willing to buy that, statistically speaking, more people who major in computer science or math will become good developers than people who major in the humanities, but that's fairly obvious: what you major in is a decent indicator of what you're interested in. Sure, not every English major who learns to code will become a rockstar ninja guru, but that's true of STEM students as well. Unless you can prove otherwise, there's no reason to believe that there's something inherent about majoring in English that inhibits the sort of analytic mindset that engineering requires.
[+] [-] ricardobeat|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jlgreco|13 years ago|reply
There is a selection bias going on though. If you are a mediocre programmer with a CS degree, you can present yourself as a programmer with little delusion. However if you are, say, an English major programmer, chances are you won't advertise yourself as a programmer unless you really are the best sort of natural.
Skilled learned in an English program certainly may help, but all of the English major programmers that I know have always been programmers. They are naturals, have known it since at least early highschool, and picked their major despite that.
[+] [-] specialist|13 years ago|reply
I said "au contraire", all the great developers I know are also great writers. In fact, if a person can't write well, I believe they probably can't code well either. I explained to the tour group that programming is just like writing an essay. Organize your thoughts, logical, clarity, etc.
Some of the best developers I've worked with come from outside tech. Ballet dancer, bus driver, EE, historian.
Because I value communication, intuition, and creativity, I get a little worried when a team only has CS nerds and script kiddies.
[+] [-] cafard|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tmh88j|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] blindhippo|13 years ago|reply
I've met philosophy majors, english majors, biology majors, comp sci majors, and even people with no university level education - all were good even great coders. I majored in History and yet have done quite well as a software developer.
I took 2 years of Computer science - it was 2 years of wasted drivel that has helped me solve ZERO real world problems. Also, I hate math. Surprise, you don't need math to code. You need to solve problems at an applied level to be a successful coder - ANY intelligent person can do this if they enjoy actually using coding tools.
Anecdotal it may be, but I've never seen any advantage to hiring or working with Comp Sci grads over other disciplines. So yes, English Majors CAN be good developers.
[+] [-] Terretta|13 years ago|reply
I prefer to hire history majors[1] as developers. They tend to do well at holding complex systems in their heads, understanding them, and explaining them.
1. Ideally history plus some kind of engineering, where engineering is defined as design, building, and use of practical engines, machines, systems, or structures. Biology can fit this definition, but not, say, sports marketing.
[+] [-] kjackson2012|13 years ago|reply
Most people won't find sitting in front of a computer day after day interesting. It takes a certain mindset to get comfortable writing and organizing things in your head an on a screen.
There is something to be said about the analogy to writing, however. When I code, I always feel like I'm trying to tell a story, and my goal is to make it easier for the next person who reads my code (likely me) to understand what I was trying to do. If it's too byzantine and "clever", and I have to sit there and think about what I was trying to do, then I'm doing something wrong.
[+] [-] lubujackson|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davimack|13 years ago|reply
A lot of what fascinated me was the underlying grammar and syntax of language and how, if you knew how to manipulate those symbols ("words") through the use of an appropriate tool (diagrams, but not the ones you remember from when you were a kid learning to write sentences) you could manipulate sentences almost like they were tree-structures - without changing the meaning.
That said, to _succeed_ as a developer, I felt compelled to go out and get a Master's in Information Systems ... but that was about career success (nobody wanted an English Major to be their IT Project Manager, for some reason).
[+] [-] douglasisshiny|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] simonsarris|13 years ago|reply
In every interview I had people pointed to the Philosophy part of my degree as a quaint curiousity and asked about it. I told of how I love writing and debate, and I think that effective communication is one of the most important and understated concepts in every scientific profession.
I love Computer Science but I really love writing and ethics[2] and conversation. I love communication and the art (and science) of effectively conveying ideas. I'd probably love advertising, to be honest.
If I had to do college all over again I'd probably try to do English/Philosophy/CS, with perhaps CS as the minor. I have enormous respect for liberal arts majors, but more-so than other majors, and I think this is very important, the value of humanities degrees are very much what you put into them. It didn't seem hard in my school at least to get a Phil/Communications/English degree compared to a STEM degree, but that in itself only meant that what you got out of a humanities degree was entirely based on your input, and there was a lot of input to be had. I definitely found humanities majors vastly more socially capable than the engineer majors, almost to an embarrassing degree.[3]
Anyway I do think that CS and any communication/writing-intensive major compliment each other grandly. It seems only natural, especially with the intersection of logic in Philosophy or clear composition in English. But I also think these majors compliment CS because I think the largest deficiency in every other CS and engineering grad I've met is that they have a hard time communicating their ideas and debating others effectively. English and Philosophy (and any writing in general) help with that. A lot, in my opinion.
I had 12 years of Catholic Schooling and they stressed the hell out of essay writing. Composition composition composition. Looking back, I feel that was a really important thing, and it made all of us better people, in terms of relating and communicating.
In fact, and I think this is the most important takeaway from my silly ramblings here, I think that writing and writing a lot makes you more a more empathetic person. I think that the more you have to put down your ideas to explain or persuade other people in a medium that you can look back on, the more you will have to consider and understand other points of view. Doubly so if you are required to write about topics that you may not be fanatic about. Anyone can write an argument about why, say, PHP sucks (or not) without getting much out of it for themselves, since they are just puking their zeal onto paper (or pixels) and probably don't give all too much thought to really convincing people. But having to consider things that you aren't already a true believer in takes a lot of nuance and brain-turning. I think, anyway.
[1] http://i.imgur.com/6oTix.jpg
[2] in the Aristotelian/Kant/Mill/Humanity's greater good/etc sense of the word, not the vague-ideas-gotten-by-parents-and-peers sense which is usually picked up on (see for instance almost the entire abortion debate)
[3] I'm quite the introvert and it took me a long time to overcome the social interaction thing that seemed to plague so many of my peers in college. I was supremely shy as a kid and tended to hide behind my mom whenever we went somewhere. My 8th grade class was just 21 people (two groups of 10 and 11), and my high school was just 500-600 people. Going in to college I was unused to, well, interaction.
In my freshman year of college it all hit me. My college (RPI) was known for being an introverted place and I met so many great people who almost literally never left their rooms. Great minds and personalities who were self-sequestered from the world.
It felt tragic sometimes. I met and found a lot of people wanted to meet people but had a great fear of simply being in public spaces more and exchanging pleasantries. Others still, and this was not an uncommon opinion, would disparage the idea of small talk as useless. It's funny but, of all places, once I came to college and met enough varied and amazing people I became vastly, vastly less shy. It just wasn't worth it to be shy when there were so many great people to meet.
[+] [-] sharkweek|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] saosebastiao|13 years ago|reply
I do not come from an English background, nor an engineering/CS background...and while I am not a developer (I do code, but not full time), I can lead a team of developers just fine within my area of expertise. I wouldn't hesitate to put an English major with moderate coding skills on a team that was tasked with Natural Language Processing.
[+] [-] sk2code|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] russell|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 16s|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codewright|13 years ago|reply
>He wrote Perl for all you youngsters out there
I don't know what's young for you, but I'm 24 and was perfectly familiar with Wall's work and background.
[+] [-] wallflower|13 years ago|reply
With weaving, you have to be attuned as the whole structure of the cloth before you start writing. You need to see the big picture and concentrate on the details.
Yes, there is no equivalent refactoring tool like an IDE for weaving but I belabor my point..
[+] [-] jgj|13 years ago|reply
That said, I think maybe you haven't read good enough fiction :)
[+] [-] columbo|13 years ago|reply
The first bubble was about 'boots on the ground' and an extremly limited pool of talent. I was getting calls to move to New York, California, Chicago... because I KNEW JAVASCRIPT. There was no stack-exchange, no learning blogs and most information was still gathered through purchasing the O'Reilly on X or submitting a question to X's newsgroup.
So the phrase "how many English majors on your dev team?" really just meant (IMHO) "How many people do you have that really don't know what they are doing"... I don't think reading that phrase in today's bubble scenario makes as much sense as it did twelve years ago.
[+] [-] jsamuel|13 years ago|reply
One of the best developers I know was an English major. He's even more amazing as a leader. He now leads a large team of engineers and I hope to someday get the chance to work with him again.
[+] [-] nicholas73|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cmccarrick|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lhnz|13 years ago|reply
I would expect cult behavior from certain kinds of developers however.