Should Ph.D.'s be Referred to as "Doctor"

In recent years, I've frequently heard people claimrule? Would it not be better to educate people on
that individuals who hold PhDs are not "real" doctors.the historical, established usage of this term--usage
These people assert that only physicians can rightfullythat persists to this day?
claim this title, and that it's inappropriate forSome say, "If you refer to a PhD-holder as 'Doctor
PhD-holders to use this term.Smith,' then people will assume that he's a physician.
Frankly, I'm surprised. I thought it was commonSo what happens if there's a medical emergency? Do
knowledge that there are both medical andyou want people running to Smith for medical help?"
non-medical doctors, and that this is a legitimate termFrankly, I think that this argument betrays a low
to use in both situations. Apparently though, commonopinion of the public's intelligence; it assumes that
knowledge isn't always as common as one wouldpeople are too dim-witted to learn, and that we may
hope. For this reason, I'd like to take a moment toas well accept the inevitable. Personally,I would rather
dispel some of the myths behind this title. (For thefight ignorance gently than assume such a lowly
sake of brevity, I shall henceforth focus on the PhDopinion of the common man's intellience. Would some
degree; however, the same arguments hold forpeople continue to think that only physicians merit
comparable degrees such as the ScD and the ThD).this title? Probably so--but I suspect that the vast
Can PhDs legitimately claim to be doctors? Absolutely!majority of individuals are intelligent enough to learn
The term "doctor" is derived from the Latin verbotherwise.
docere, which means "to teach." Historically, it refersFor some reason, many also think that the MD is
to a teacher or, by extension, a scholar. It did notmuch more difficult to attain than a PhD. I can
specifically refer to a physician. This title was laterunderstand why; after all, we've all heard horror
co-opted by the medical community though, due tostories about medical students working long hours
the respect and prestige that it imputes. In one ofand stayin up all through the night. However, people
life's great ironies, many uninformed laypeople nowsimply don't realize how laborious a PhD program can
percieve the medical degree to be more prestigiousbe. PhD students often have to engage in long hours
than the lowly PhD, declaring that people who haveof grueling studies and research if they wish to
earned the latter are "not real doctors."complete their studies in a timely fashion. Mind you,I
Some people say, "Well, most people only think ofwould never deny that med students are bright, and
physicians as doctors. According to the rules ofthat medical school is a long and arduous process; in
common usage then, PhD-holders shouldn't use thismy experience though, PhD students typically work
title." I understand the appeal of this argument, butjust as hard, if not moreso.
frankly, I think it's fallacious. There are manyI'd say that when it comes to years of study, PhD
individuals that are known to the public asprograms are more demanding as well. When starting
"Doctor"--Dr. Martin Luther King, Dr. Joyce Brothersfrom a bachelor's degree, a PhD typically takes from
and Dr. Laura Schlessinger. None of these individualssix to eight years to complete, as opposed to four
has a medical degree, and yet they are commonlyyears for the medical degree.
accorded this title.When someone declares that physicians are the only
Moreover, I think that this argument panders toreal doctors, he is simply mistaken. I'd say that PhDs
ignorance, rather than fighting it. If a large portion ofhave every right to this title--and I say that based on
the population thinks that (or acts as though) onlythe title's etymology, the demands of their programs
MD-holders truly merit the title of "doctor," should weand the accepted, contemporary usage of this term,
bend over backwards and let their misperceptionseven outside of academic circles.