MD/humanities programs

[dazzle]

Do you know of any programs in Canada that offer an MD program combined with grad school in humanities? I would love to do a MD/MA or MD/PhD degree in philosophy and medicine.

 

Thanks!

[hotdamn]

If you chase two rabbits you will lose them both.

[A-Stark]

Probably in the States somewhere - possibly at schools that have combined MD/PhD programs, but it's less likely they'd let you do a degree outside the Faculty of Medicine.

 

Anyway, if you're really interested in philosophy or, more specifically, bioethics, you can get involved in that sort of thing in a simple MD.

[Alai]

Why do you even need a degree in Humanities? I can see why you'd need an MD if you want to study medicine properly (because it's pretty much illegal otherwise), but to do a degree in humanities just because you love the idea of having degrees seems strange to me. You can always study on your own, several universities offer online courses now and the world is filled with libraries filled with books.

[markov79]

you could also always go back to school (although, admittedly, this might be harder... but i suspect not much harder than attempting md + grad school). delaying grad school in this fashion (ie going back after you've done your residency+fellowships etc) would probably give you more perspective on whether or not you need that. as above posters have essentially asked, is it really necessary? if you deem it so, then i'm sure you'd be able to find a grad school that would be willing to take a well-trained md. (see james orbinski for one "celebrity" example).

 

edit: lol at MD/MA program. i bet you come out of that in ecstasy.

[apache]

GOD, me too!!!!

 

U of C will, ditto U of T! my school said it wasn't allowed… lol. maybe well talk when i come out of stanford

 

Do you know of any programs in Canada that offer an MD program combined with grad school in humanities? I would love to do a MD/MA or MD/PhD degree in philosophy and medicine.

 

Thanks!

[apache]

not at all, medical anthropology, studying various communication methods between doctors patients and outcomes… so many things… this isn't mental masturbation, this has real effects on patient outcomes. What about medical sociology to make hospitals more efficient or increase co-operation between various health practitioners… i think we've distinguished the pragmatist philosopher from the ivory tower on this post

 

p.s. i could easily link reductionistic materialism, adopted because of political desires… link it to language, which facilitates phenomenological understanding, reinforcing materialism, and how this leads to the current medical model… and do it populist too… when you grasp everything, you see how much the most disparate things connect.

 

btw, i learned therapy (and i'm told over and over by authorities with "titles", i.e. md's, phd's … honestly, only the very best ones have the same skill set, and i'm being completely serious) i'm, more or less prodigious… well, best persn they've seen in their career prodigious (frankly, i lie sometimes, to bring myself down, not vice versa) … by sitting on the street talking to homeless people, people who had recently committed suicide… ino, it doesn't sound as arrogant when you explain it, do most people hang out and talk to the mentally ill on the street for an hour, nah…

 

point is, there's no proper way to be good at medicine, if you want a license, or a signal of authority to those who lack enough information to ascertain your competence, then yes, there is… but dazzle and me seem a like

 

Why do you even need a degree in Humanities? I can see why you'd need an MD if you want to study medicine properly (because it's pretty much illegal otherwise), but to do a degree in humanities just because you love the idea of having degrees seems strange to me. You can always study on your own, several universities offer online courses now and the world is filled with libraries filled with books.

[apache]

there's a problem here… at times i feel humanities and sciences should be combined, they're the same thing… i wont even explain how science is a branch of philosophy. but, let's think… how's the biological model working out… my doctor knows more medicine than most interests I've met, is psychiatrists par excellence, knows philosophy in and out, travelled the world, know's world religion. Are you doing to read Husserl, phenomenology… doubt it, even the concept of syndrome… how syndrome is defined in clinical trials versus clinical use, this is philosophy of language, social psychology… patient compliance in order to prevent excess surgical spending…

 

also, psych's don't see borderline patients, post war ptsd, they can't handle them, and if they can, they're incompetent… this is a core of my docs practice, and her success rate is exponential… to be a doctor is to heal, to heal doesn't predispose a method of healing

 

to be frank, the trad students i dealt with, my god, so grossly unimpressive at times… it's like speaking in spanish to someone who doesn't understand… unless you've studied the humanities in depth (I've done both, Bsc, BA, I could have graduated with either, minus maybe one course… a language) so I feel rather qualified to comment.

 

If you chase two rabbits you will lose them both.

[apache]

lol, im no prodigy at all, in the traditional sense of possessing innate talent at something, but well, having to compensate for a few cognitive faculties that barely function

 

since medication i take for a visual problem involved in inhibitory processiing of visual information v5 in my occipital lobe totally wipes my short term memory... you get these stream of consciousness type posts, since all my memory is via working memory (relational memory, making propositions from known facts etc., essentially instead of remembering labels i associate tons of characteristics... which gives me a huge advantage in terms of generating information, and novel idea's, as well as verbal communication, but writing on the fly, totally kills me, because i write almost as if im having a dialogue... if i edit as i go, the short term memory cops out, so yeah... every paper i write... the rough draft looks like my posts, i only edit it into apa etc. post hoc... honestly, this post took me like 15 min, and writing it straight would have been 3-5... that's the thing, those lengthy posts don't take me long really... i think people think so, but most take very little time.

 

who know's, why do i bother? the stuff i get paid for and the stuff i put out... that's not on a board (i.e. editing essays or writing for a psych lab, is pure APA, grammatical, then again i get paid a lot for the prior)

 

in rl im actually an uber chill person, i just seem condescending on here because most of my posts are about things i've had very emotional experiences with (seeing someone cut themselves over 1000 times for example - i'm not trying to be crude, just forthright, and that, well that's more on the milder side... so you can only imagine). i think that's why i tend to just call some people stupid, they're not stupid, however, the fact that they don't realize their ignorance, the fact that medicine doesn't occur in a bubble, and likely haven't seen the consequences a lack of critical thinking can have on a human beings life is frustrating. i think having seen so much of this just tends to make me more emotionally motivated... this isn't an avenue for change, avenues for change are where i make sure my writing is spot on, top to bottom.

 

lol, on an aside, i only thnk a few people on here are stupid, and i'm not a prodigy, unless you meant the therapy thing, even then, that's what other people tell me, and it's one specific thing... intelligentsia bs... just a product of having to rely on working memory, being motivated by stuff i've seen that makes working harder than everyone else easy, and doing what i enjoy and care about ... tbh, i'd rather watch soccer than talk philosophy

 

cheers hun

 

it likely seems unintelligible because of numerous logic leaps: a->b->c->d->e->f and i just state a and f... if i wrote out everything i wanted to convey, i'd hit the max 25000 character limit and need ten posts.

 

btw... nietschze got me into philosophy and the arts... foucault, wittgenstein and kuhn are my all time faves.

 

 

 

 

 

Muse, I have to say, I frequently agree with you...that is, when I'm able to parse what you're trying to say.

It's probably because I've studied philosophy, anthropology, history, political science, and linguistics. I completely agree that humanities is an incredibly valuable background to have in med as there is a shocking lack of critical thinking in medicine and medical fields in general.

That, and I live with a philospher/ex-politician who has written extensively on pharmaceutical crime and medical discourse.

 

That said, something about you puzzles me.

Now, I haven't said anything until now, but clearly someone willing to refer to themselves as a prodigy on the internet is willing to be the target of a bit of criticism. So, why is your writing so unintelligible? Why the Britney Spears esque overuse of "..." instead of a period? Whenever I read "..." I mentally pause, which makes your giant paragraphs of argot seem halted and disjointed.

 

You clearly have something you want to say, but I can't quite wrap my mind around why you put in the time to write so many lengthy posts, which almost no one will put in the time to try and decipher beyond "uh, okay, this dude thinks he's a genius and that we're all idiots because we've never read Neitzsche"

[lost__in__space]

University of Toronto has such a program, and there is a student already in the MD/PhD program who is doing his PhD in the history of medicine. I am also in this program but my PhD is in engineering.

 

http://mdphd.utoronto.ca/program

[AtomSmasherXVIII]

This thread reminds of me TV show Pimp My Ride, in which the host of the show takes peoples' crappy cars, then "pimps them out" with assorted household items such as refridgerators, washing machines, fish tanks, etc.

 

The OP is the guy who thinks that having a washing machine in the trunk of his car is a good idea.

[Alai]

Muse, from what I understand of your post, it didn't really address my question of why you actually need an MA or a PhD in humanities to gain the Humanities knowledge necessary, be it philosophy or medical anthro or what have you.

[apache]

i was discussing writing an original piece of work, something of influence in the medical field perhaps

 

what about... what is the purpose of medical practice... to improve patients lives as much as possible, according to their measures of well being and happiness... or according to pre-ordained determinents of wellness we paternalistic tell patients are the tenants of "health".

nature, or science, i forget wrote... an article advocating the right to use ritalin for academic endeavors... how does medicine answer this... or assisted suicide etc.

 

personally, i'm very libertarian... and i hope systemic study into these issues from people who work in everyday medical practice as well as have backgrounds in the humanities continues to spring forth, there's always new idea's, perspectives to take into account...

 

it seems everyone here's read doing right... md/phd(ethics wrote it)... philosophy of science with regard to medicine and what's considered valid medicine, what's pseudoscientific... thomas szaszs libertarian perspective on mental illness... these have been influential to many practioners paradigms...

 

Muse, from what I understand of your post, it didn't really address my question of why you actually need an MA or a PhD in humanities to gain the Humanities knowledge necessary, be it philosophy or medical anthro or what have you.

[NLengr]

Could someone provide any objective evidence that having an extensive background in humanities makes you a better physician? If not, all this talk is just intellectual self stimulation.

[Lactic Folly]

I read a study once where a humanities background was associated with going into psychiatry, but not necessarily with patient centred skills.

[lost__in__space]

Why is anyone hating on someone having MORE knowledge? If the OP wants a combined degree then let them have it. Even just being in and experiencing grad school is an amazing growing opportunity and anything that broadens your horizons as a person will make you a better physician. Plus if you want to do health related research, your combined degree will benefit you.

[Alai]

Muse, I STILL don't see why this study needs to be systematic. Is it for the benefit of society, or for learning purposes? If it's for the benefit of society, then I think it would be best to complete your medical education, get some experience in the field and then set forth on doing an MA or PhD in Humanities. I still don't see how a combined degree is really conducive even to that goal.

[markov79]

Muse, I STILL don't see why this study needs to be systematic. Is it for the benefit of society, or for learning purposes? If it's for the benefit of society, then I think it would be best to complete your medical education, get some experience in the field and then set forth on doing an MA or PhD in Humanities. I still don't see how a combined degree is really conducive even to that goal.

 

plus onesies

[dazzle]

Muse for god's sake, write proper english. You have something to say as a philosopher.. I would just love to be able to read it.

 

God you people are hostile. I come from a philosophy background and I would like to continue researching in humanities. I don't know why I should have to justify that. I think it should be embraced really.

 

Studying humanities while doing a simple MD does not make feasible sense, if one is serious about their studies in humanities. It would also be useful to have the type of accreditation, sense of accomplishment that a degree can provide.

 

So, going back on subject, U of T? I was hoping to stay in Quebec really...

[NLengr]

Simple MD

 

Does not compute.

[A-Stark]

i was discussing writing an original piece of work, something of influence in the medical field perhaps

 

what about... what is the purpose of medical practice... to improve patients lives as much as possible, according to their measures of well being and happiness... or according to pre-ordained determinents of wellness we paternalistic tell patients are the tenants of "health".

nature, or science, i forget wrote... an article advocating the right to use ritalin for academic endeavors... how does medicine answer this... or assisted suicide etc.

 

I've certainly read some of these "armchair" medical practice theories and ideas. There is no substitute for experiencing and exploring patient preferences directly - in clinic, in a family room outside the ICU, on rounds. The purpose of a degree in sociology or philosophy of medicine would be simply to review the existing literature and (depending on the level) contribute to it. But I don't think you need a degree for any of that. And, personally, I don't like over-theorizing or soft "phenomenological qualitative research".

 

personally, i'm very libertarian... and i hope systemic study into these issues from people who work in everyday medical practice as well as have backgrounds in the humanities continues to spring forth, there's always new idea's, perspectives to take into account...

 

it seems everyone here's read doing right... md/phd(ethics wrote it)... philosophy of science with regard to medicine and what's considered valid medicine, what's pseudoscientific... thomas szaszs libertarian perspective on mental illness... these have been influential to many practioners paradigms...

 

Bioethicists do have some involvement in direct clinical practice and tend to have a fair bit to offer in terms of clarification of issues at play. Having said that, I think that study of the history of medicine should be required for medical students - at least a bit - to understand how we got to where we are now. That doesn't mean there's any use of suffering through treatises in critical theory.

 

Muse for god's sake, write proper english. You have something to say as a philosopher.. I would just love to be able to read it.

 

God you people are hostile. I come from a philosophy background and I would like to continue researching in humanities. I don't know why I should have to justify that. I think it should be embraced really.

 

I did my undergrad honours in political science and wrote a thesis discussing popular sovereignty as understood by Rousseau and others and pertaining specifically to Quebec and the Clarity Act. I'm pretty sure I even cited Althusser somewhere. The following summer I slogged through several texts on theoretical conceptions of human needs from the critical theory approach.

 

I can't think of a single time in medical training that any of that has really been all that helpful, except that as a one-time arts student I can still write very, very well.

 

Studying humanities while doing a simple MD does not make feasible sense, if one is serious about their studies in humanities. It would also be useful to have the type of accreditation, sense of accomplishment that a degree can provide.

 

As someone with not one but two masters degrees, I'd say that I feel more embarrassed about prior career indecision (or backup plans as the case really was) than any sense of accomplishment. But you are quite right that for a physician an MA or PhD in philosophy would be very much a vanity project.

 

There is an absolutely tremendous amount of information to learn, forget, and then re-learn in undergraduate medical training alone. "Simple MD" indeed. What year of undergrad are you in?

[dazzle]

Obviously I did not mean simple as in easy. I am sure you could pick that up in your more charitable moods. I am going in my final year now for philosophy BA. I did a BSc before so I know all about indecision.

 

Some posts in this thread assume that because I want to do an MD all my efforts in life should be gathered in the direction of being a better physician. How do you know that my studies in medicine should not be gathered in the direction of becoming a better philosopher?

 

Regardless, I have been thinking about a few issues in philosophy (none related to history of medicine or philosophy of science, as much as this would serve as ideal side-material while doing medical school), and I could not do them justice if I did not dedicate time to them. While doing a philosophy degree, I realize how rigorously one needs to think and research about something before forming even a presentable piece of opinion or writing. This sense of rigor is not something that I want to lose with medical school when it comes to forming ideas in the humanities. In a sense, this side of the practice (socio-intellectual) is more important to me than the textbook regurgitation one, so it would be fair in this case to consider a double degree. To consider it as simple intellectual masturbation wouldn't do justice to what may be necessary for my self-fulfillment.

 

Again, as much as there may be content to some responses here, I'm appalled by them, especially since they come from future doctors. I must say that it is one of my biggest fears about medical school to have to be mostly with people without sensibility for the humanities.

[lost__in__space]

Obviously I did not mean simple as in easy. I am sure you could pick that up in your more charitable moods. I am going in my final year now for philosophy BA. I did a BSc before so I know all about indecision.

 

Some posts in this thread assume that because I want to do an MD all my efforts in life should be gathered in the direction of being a better physician. How do you know that my studies in medicine should not be gathered in the direction of becoming a better philosopher?

 

Regardless, I have been thinking about a few issues in philosophy (none related to history of medicine or philosophy of science, as much as this would serve as ideal side-material while doing medical school), and I could not do them justice if I did not dedicate time to them. While doing a philosophy degree, I realize how rigorously one needs to think and research about something before forming even a presentable piece of opinion or writing. This sense of rigor is not something that I want to lose with medical school when it comes to forming ideas in the humanities. In a sense, this side of the practice (socio-intellectual) is more important to me than the textbook regurgitation one, so it would be fair in this case to consider a double degree. To consider it as simple intellectual masturbation wouldn't do justice to what may be necessary for my self-fulfillment.

 

Again, as much as there may be content to some responses here, I'm appalled by them, especially since they come from future doctors. I must say that it is one of my biggest fears about medical school to have to be mostly with people without sensibility for the humanities.

 

Not all of us are like that, again, see my comments and perhaps think about applying to the combined program, which already has a student like you. There is NOTHING wrong with wanting to educate yourself by obtaining a grad degree. I have NO CLUE why people would hate on such an endeavour....it's sad.

 

Anyway, as Domo says:

 

[dazzle]

Thanks LostinSpace. I appreciated your contribution in this thread.

 

By the way, was it insanely hard to get into your program? I do have a good GPA but McGill says that a masters degree is needed for their MD/PhD program.

[apache]

Kierkegaard, Sarte, Levinas are big for me… personally, but obviously i identify more with social critics, since that's more my past.

 

I enjoy Camus' fictional writings, I honestly haven't rad any of his pure philosophical works.

 

i remember writing a 25 page autobiographical self deception essay based on Kierkegaard that changed my life… I really identify with Sarte's concept of being, although my personal ethics aren't as a laissez faire as his… i do appreciate him pointing out the various ways we can be en pour though… i really feel him and Foucault in so many ways because they refused to sit back, they engaged in society and lived their philosophies.

 

What if the required simplicity of scientific study, which preordains bottom up causality out of necessity (emergent objects coherently affecting more reducible things cannot be studied systemically medically, but non-locality of electron pairing is well know… there are a number of strange things which preclude scientific investigation of medical phenomena, but in fact, preclude ontological (true nature of reality versus models which are predictive) scientific studies… top-bottom causality is on for example: brains influence random number generators, not by a lot, but the sample size is so high the statistical power is overwhelming, yet, we think that which provides utility (predictive power) must also be linguistically labelled truly, an electron is a set of symbols predicting experience… not a description of what language leads you to perceive as a solid in space.

 

i honestly pretty much enjoy everything… but i know where a lot of more esoteric philophy ends up (post-modernism self evident truth, lol), so i prefer to avoid that and focus more on world philosophy… i really love epistemology, ontology, philosophy of science though. Ethics to me, well, I like to get my way, but you can tell I'm obviously hardcore post modern, and wan't my way, so to me it's just rhetoric as a means to an ends.

 

You'd be surprised how many people will get depressed about not believing in free will and take SSRI's… lol, I've met 3, so who know's, maybe philosophy is useful.

 

 

 

 

Cool beans dude.

 

Thanks for taking the time to actually answer my questions and not just getting offended. I was legitimately curious, so I appreciate the candour.

 

I live with a Foucault, Baudrillard, Althusser expert; whereas I'm much more knowleadgeable in existentialists like Kirkegaard. I much prefer philosophy to soccer

 

Cheers.