Talk:List of scientific occupations

Needs Work
This article needs a lot of work. The placement into categories is not exactly reliable or accurate. As an example from my personal field: a pathologist, a biomedical scientist, and a medical laboratory scientist work in the same setting and have the same objective with similar means to get there (the latter two are actually the same role) and as such they should be under the same category. Quite honestly since their primary functions do not often focus on providing novel research they should be placed under applied science (IMO). Axelarater (talk) 16:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Occupations
Dump of occupations from the original list of occupations article, please add them to the article as suitable.


 * Archaeologist
 * Astronaut
 * Astronomer
 * Biologist
 * Marine biologist
 * Cartographer
 * Chemist
 * Flavorist
 * Cosmonaut
 * Cryptozoologist
 * Ecologist
 * Engineering
 * Electrical Engineer
 * Industrial Engineer
 * Mechanical Engineer
 * Sound Engineer
 * Software engineer
 * Forester
 * Genealogist
 * Geologist
 * Historian
 * Inventor
 * Kinesiologist
 * Linguist
 * Mathematician
 * Mechanician
 * Neurologist
 * Numismatics
 * Nutritionist
 * Obstetrician
 * Ocularist
 * Odontologist
 * Oncologist
 * Ontologist
 * Ornithologist (birdlore)
 * Paleontologist
 * Pathologist
 * Pedologist (soil)
 * Philologist
 * Philosopher
 * Physicist
 * Researcher
 * Scientist
 * Sonographer
 * Taxonomist
 * Urologist
 * Zoologist

Suggestion: a list of nonscientific or pseudoscientific occupations?
I believe compiling a list of occupations which are nonscientific or pseudoscientific (eg.: Reiki, naturopathy, alchemy) could be productive, but I am not sure if they should be combined into one article or not. I expect this endeavour would prove more contentious than it should be. Any thoughts? — Guillaume Pelletier ~ 03:18, 5 January 2019 (UTC)