Why Don't Engineers Learn Proofs?

It depends on how the institution organizes courses. Of those 6-8 courses, 4-5 are lectures and the rest are corresponding labs. All in all it boils down to about 14-18 credits per semester, which is just a standard STEM load plus a bit more.

You do proofs in order to understand why something is true, beyond intuition (since intuition is often just fooling yourself that you understand something which you don't)

t. Software engineer who does proofs

They don't need to in order to do their jobs.

Just like how pro athletes don't get their own water, but need it to function.

Mathfags are literally waterboys for engys.

Why do I, as someone who isnt doing research in mathematics, care "why" something is true? If it works it works, and that's all that matters.

>the Chad flags
turned a 7/10 to a 9/10

Because the scope of problems you can effectively solve will be severely limited if you don't understand how something works.

Take rotation matrices as a simple example. If someone just knows that plugging the right numbers into the right slot gived the result they want, they'll never be able to use this tool in a different context.

Someone with a good idea of WHY they work, however, can easily use that understanding to tweak the usual plug and chug into something useful outside the usual plug and chug context.

Who needs proofs? It should just work.

qt trap

Good engineers do learn proofs

The value of the intuition you build while trying out practical stuff trumps knowledge of proofs.