SHAKSPER 2000: Re: "Doctors"

From: Hardy M. Cook (editor@ws.bowiestate.edu)
Date: 01/11/00 

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0051  Tuesday, 11 January 2000.

[1]     From:   Jeffery Myers <jmyers@goucher.edu>
        Date:   Monday, 10 Jan 2000 12:54:49 -0500
        Subj:   "Doctors"; was Re: Goofy Answers

[2]     From:   Seán Lawrence <seanlawrence@writeme.com>
        Date:   Monday, 10 Jan 2000 19:31:52 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.0045 Re: Goofy Answers


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jeffery Myers <jmyers@goucher.edu>
Date:           Monday, 10 Jan 2000 12:54:49 -0500
Subject:        "Doctors"; was Re: Goofy Answers

Of course, we are the real "doctors."  As I tell my wife, she and her
ilk are only body plumbers.

Jeff Myers

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Seán Lawrence <seanlawrence@writeme.com>
Date:           Monday, 10 Jan 2000 19:31:52 -0800
Subject: 11.0045 Re: Goofy Answers
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.0045 Re: Goofy Answers

Melissa Aaron writes:

>I think it's precisely to avoid this sort of confusion that it's become
>traditional for Ph.D.s not to be called "Doctor" socially.  Or, as I
>told my father, happy that he would have two doctors in the family, "If
>someone collapses and asks if there's a doctor in the house, all I can
>do is recite Marvell at them."

Personally, I think that it's the physicians who should give up the
title. Our predecessors were doctors when theirs were leech salesmen.

Cheers,
Seán.


about SHAKSPER | current postings | submitted papers | browse SHAKSPER | search SHAKSPER
  
Copyright © 2002, Hardy M. Cook, design by Eric Luhrs. All rights reserved.