3 ms·
Yup. A doctor of philosophy is a doctor; but he shouldn't be allowed to call himself a Doctor of Medicine, if he doesn't have a doctorate in medicine. [Edit] "
by denton-scratch 3y ago
Yup. A doctor of philosophy is a doctor; but he shouldn't be allowed to call himself a Doctor of Medicine, if he doesn't have a doctorate in medicine.
[Edit] "Doctor" is from the Latin docēre, "to teach". That is, a doctor in some field is a person with enough expertise to teach that field. From that POV, a medical doctor is an anomaly; my General Practitioner is an MD, but he's not qualified to teach medical students.
- danaris 3y agoAnd "terrific" is from the Latin terrificus, "terrifying, frightening"[0]. I'm not sure if it's a formal fallacy, but "argument from etymology" is, at best, an extremely weak argument. Just because that's what the word came from over 1000 years ago doesn't mean that's how we do or should use it today. A doctor is one who has a doctorate. Period. That is what the word means today. Plenty of people without doctorates teach, in all kinds of ways. (For one thing, grade school teachers in the US are only required to have a Masters at most.) [0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/terrific https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/terrific
- drewcoo 3y agoThe GP was using equivocation: doctor (physician) and doctor (someone with a PhD). And that is absolutely fallacious.
- yashap 3y agoMy favourite rant on this topic: https://youtu.be/1BCXJ3yC65o?si=KYISeoi6hS-PmZPh https://youtu.be/1BCXJ3yC65o?si=KYISeoi6hS-PmZPh RIP Andre Braugher