Software for the finest computer – The Mind


Posted by Tim Bryce on November 11, 2015


– “Theorists” versus “Practicals.”

To use this segment in a Radio broadcast or Podcast, send TIM a request.

I have met a lot of college professors in my lifetime, be it when I went to school, when I lectured on systems, or in various discussion groups on the Internet. From my perspective, they fit into two categories:

1. Practical people teaching proven concepts, as in engineering, chemistry, history, math, and English.

2. Theorists who invent a bunch of gobbledygook offering no practical use. I have found such people in sociology, political science, management, and very prevalent in information technology.

I have found the “Practicals” to be more interesting as they are more confident of their subject matter and are excited about communicating their body of knowledge to their students. To me, they are down to earth people who are practical in nature and willing to assist you any way possible. They are the type of people you would like to share a beer with and talk shop.

The “Theorists” are entirely different. Their world is based on observations and evidence, but no concrete proof, hence they lack the confidence of the “Practicals.” Instead, their world revolves around argument, which can be quite loud and vehement at times. Their bravado in discourse is based on their lack of confidence. Some people refer to them as pseudo-intellectuals, others as academic quacks. It is like they have got a bolt lose somewhere but don’t know how to tighten it. When I listen to them I get the uneasy feeling I should be holding my wallet. Rarely have I seen the “Theorists” produce anything practical for use, which is why many of them can best be described as “humbug.”

I do not have a problem with professors teaching proven concepts; but I do have a problem when they try to disguise their ideas as gospel. In the process, they invent a junk vocabulary intended more to confuse you than to prove their point. They are also content doing small things in the hopes of it leading to something bigger. When I listen to the Theorists, I am somehow reminded of the expression, “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin.” In other words, much ado about nothing.

It is one thing to theorize something, selling the concept to earn a livelihood is quite another. Most of the Theorists would likely starve without the backing of the college or university. As for me, I tend to believe in the old English proverb, “Necessity is the mother of invention.” It has been my experience the effective techniques used in management and information systems were derived from legitimate business needs. For example, our “PRIDE”-Information Systems Engineering Methodology (ISEM) was created to satisfy the need to build integrated enterprise-wide systems resulting from the “Management Information Systems” (MIS) movement of the 1960’s.

There have been many other offerings developed over the years to expedite systems development, but we took a scientific approach to the problem and defined our terminology and principles. The fact it still works after +40 years means it has stood the test of time.

In the end, the real test of whether you perceive someone as a “Practical” or a “Theorist” is whether you would enjoy a beer with them or not. As for me, I have developed a taste for Stella Artois, but I’ll drink just about anything ice cold.

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at

For Tim’s columns, see:

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2015 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

NEXT UP:  FALLING INTO A RUT – Getting out is a lot harder than getting in.

LAST TIME:  UNDERSTANDING BUSINESS PROCESS DESIGN  – A primer; it’s not what tools you use, but rather knowing what you are doing.

Listen to Tim on WJTN-AM (News Talk 1240) “The Town Square” with host John Siggins (Mon, Wed, Fri, 12:30-3:00pm Eastern); WZIG-FM (104.1) in Palm Harbor,FL; and KIT-AM 1280 in Yakima, Washington “The Morning News” with hosts Dave Ettl & Lance Tormey (weekdays. 6:00-9:00am Pacific). Or tune-in to Tim’s channel on YouTube.


7 Responses to “ACADEMIC QUACKS”

  1. The thing that comes to mind with this post is “why are they talking loud, but saying nothing?”

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Francis Dryden said

    These pseudo intellects get pails full of grant money to expound upon their mostly negative “theories” as well… seems those controlling grants (5 Billion a year with the US government alone) wouldn’t invest a nickel in a person looking to improve something when they can pay billions to tear theories apart and/or defy them… funny world we “live” in with way to many “funny” people doing stupid things.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Tim Bryce said

    A B.H. in Boulder, Colorado wrote…

    “When I was in engineering school back in the 60’s, we used to define a “sociologist” as someone who never ceased to be amazed by the obvious.

    Basically, there are two kinds of mathematicians: (1) APPLIED mathematicians – these are the engineers, physicists, and scientists that USE mathematics in their work. They really don’t care all THAT much for how you prove things, just that they have been proven over time. (2) THEORETICAL mathematicians – typically the professors who teach mathematics – they really don’t care how you USE the math, only that the PROOF is elegant.

    The two groups don’t particularly get along all that well, and therein lies the reason why MANY (not all) colleges and universities offering engineering degrees are increasingly putting the necessary mathematics (after calculus anyway) INSIDE their engineering courses instead of sending their students over to the math departments. Either that, or the engineering schools are putting their engineering professors into the math departments for the express purpose of teaching the engineers the necessary concepts.”


  4. Tim Bryce said

    A P.W. of Tarpon Springs, Florida wrote…

    “Right on!”


  5. A theologian would say of the contrast that the “theorists” are “so heavenly-minded that they’re of no earthly good!”

    From my 35+ years in and around schools, I’d note the incredible amount of damage done by ‘theorists’ in that field, who develop and then convince their disciples in school administration to slug down unlimited quantities of theoretical Kool Aid. At their hands, our public schools have become the change-agent for every ‘new idea’ and experiment in social-engineering that comes down the pike, with good vs. extraordinarily bad ideas running, probably, 100/1. When it’s all said and done, they become what one commentator observed as the cultural equivalent of an auto-immune disease: repeatedly tinkering with an essentially functional and useful institution and, ultimately, neutering it or even turning it against the organism as a whole.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. […] ACADEMIC QUACKS […]


  7. […] Food Sampler” “Just Plain Weird” “Who’s on Beef?” “Academic Quacks” “One Week’s Madness” “The Dichotomy of Our Drug Culture” “Make […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: