From wikipedia:
"In many countries, engineering tasks such as the design of bridges, electric power plants, industrial equipment, machine design and chemical plants, must be approved by a licensed professional engineer. Most commonly titled professional engineer"
"In the United States, engineering is a regulated profession whose practice and practitioners are licensed and governed by law. Licensure is generally attainable through combination of education, pre-examination (Fundamentals of Engineering exam), examination (professional engineering exam),[19] and engineering experience (typically in the area of 5+ years). Each state tests and licenses professional engineers."
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying you might be fighting collective delusion in the wrong place.
This is what the summary mentions as the only supporting evidence of any sort of credentialing:
“The foundational qualifications of an engineer typically include a 4-year bachelor's degree in an engineering discipline, or in some jurisdictions, a master's degree in an engineering discipline plus 4–6 years of peer-reviewed professional practice (culminating in a project report or thesis) and passage of engineering board examinations.”
Note that the word used is “typically” - this is very different than being a requirement. The definition of a professional engineer cited mentions no such credentialing required, speaking in broad terms of the characteristics & responsibilities of one, but no narrow hallmark of how one reaches the title.
The part he quoted is far from verifying his/her claim - just the opposite, it is evidence that he/she is misusing the term professional engineer and is not distinguishing from a licensed professional engineer from a professional engineer.
On the other hand, if you claim you are an engineer to the usa gov't then yeah, that gets you in hot water. I also tend to avoid calling myself a software engineer specifically to avoid potential issues like that, but I do lost the full job title given to me by previous employers when asked and on my resume.
The difference, roughly, if I remember correctly, is that Professional Engineers are the only ones who can “sign off” on work and essentially assume liability. Therefore, you can be an uncertified Engineer as long as you’re working under someone certified or if your work doesn’t require sign-off from someone certified.
Are there any PE’s here that can tell me if that’s correct?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/12/0...
It’s easy for people to forget that the engineering came first. The students came after. You can argue the point all day, but it will always come down to one person figuring shit out by themselves.
Total BS, to be a pharmacist you need to have a Doctor of Pharmacy (which is an advanced degree!) and be licensed by the appropriate government entity. Those 6-8 years of schooling aren't exactly optional.
Obviously, you can ask the pharmacist questions and get additional info, but that's not required for someone to hand me my vitamin D supplements.
It would save highly motivated self learners or people learning in an apprenticeship type situation such as an open source contributer years of their life, lots of money, and allow them to more quickly contribute to society.