This is a tangent, but I wonder why Thiel assumes a “standard” education is useful for doctors but dismisses it for other specializations.
I’d love to have Yvain comment on this—I wouldn’t automatically assume that medical school consists, in proportion, of more useful stuff than (say) a degree in software engineering (as opposed to stuff that you have to learn just to show that you’re able to compete with your peers in areas of performance that are deemed to matter). I’d suspect, rather, that doctors - much like software engineers—mostly learn on the job.
I mean that even if doctors and software engineers learn the same amount in school, a “standard” education would still be more useful for a doctor than for an engineer, because an officially recognized title of “doctor” has more legal implications (for prescriptions, insurance, reimbursements, lawsuits, etc.). A hospital that hires someone without a medical degree to work as a doctor is taking a much bigger risk than a software company that hires someone without an engineering degree, even if in both cases the person is as skilled as someone with a degree (I expect lawyers would be in the same basket as doctors here).
At least, that would be my answer to “why Thiel assumes a “standard” education is useful for doctors but dismisses it for other specializations.”
Sorry. I’ve slept on this, and I still don’t see the relevance of lawsuits.
Thiel says: “For some people, such as future doctors, the time and cost of four years of college may be worth it.” That statement isn’t about the people who hire future doctors, who can cover their collective asses by ensuring they have someone who has the proper sanction from the state. It isn’t about the clients of future doctors either, or any other stakeholder population who might prefer that doctors hold a degree.
The statement is about the doctors, and what would be worthwhile to them.
B) Go to college, study engineering or business or whatnot, then work in a tech company or even start one yourself
C) Drop out and just start a company straight away
… then the same kind of people might be interested in B) and C), and for them, C) might be better than B). For doctors, there is no equivalent to C) (I don’t think you can really be a “freelance doctor” without any degree). The path to ‘Doctor’ goes through A) only, the path to ‘Tech Entrepreneur’ goes through both B) and C) (The path to “Lawyer” isn’t very branchy either).
Though if you mean, it may still be better for some people who were considering medical school to drop that and go do something else, then I don’t disagree, I don’t know enough about the advantages of various careers.
(I’m having trouble figuring out whether we are disagreeing, and if so, about what)
I don’t think you can really be a “freelance doctor” without any degree
You can’t, but basically I’m wondering whether Thiel means that as the only reason why “the time and cost of four years of college may be worth it”, or if he also thinks that the educational value justifies it.
For doctors, there is no equivalent to C) (I don’t think you can really be a “freelance doctor” without any degree).
Well, of course it depends on what it is about being a doctor I value. If I want to help sick people become healthy, for example, there are lots of equivalents to C.
Admittedly, the most effective ones don’t involve practicing medicine, which falls into the “go do something else” category. But even if I what I want is to help sick people become healthy by practicing medicine, there are still equivalents to C—there are plenty of areas full of sick people who can be helped to become healthy through the practice of medicine without a degree.
There just isn’t a lot of status or money in doing that.
Note that a fair bit of the six or seven years of medical school is internship or case studies, so the “learning on the job” bit blurs with the university learning.
Also, the main point of medical school in particular, and many university courses in general, is not the learning, but the certificate at the end to prove that you know stuff and have experience.
This is a tangent, but I wonder why Thiel assumes a “standard” education is useful for doctors but dismisses it for other specializations.
I’d love to have Yvain comment on this—I wouldn’t automatically assume that medical school consists, in proportion, of more useful stuff than (say) a degree in software engineering (as opposed to stuff that you have to learn just to show that you’re able to compete with your peers in areas of performance that are deemed to matter). I’d suspect, rather, that doctors - much like software engineers—mostly learn on the job.
Do users of buggy software often sue coders on grounds of “practice of engineering without a license”?
I don’t see the connection.
I mean that even if doctors and software engineers learn the same amount in school, a “standard” education would still be more useful for a doctor than for an engineer, because an officially recognized title of “doctor” has more legal implications (for prescriptions, insurance, reimbursements, lawsuits, etc.). A hospital that hires someone without a medical degree to work as a doctor is taking a much bigger risk than a software company that hires someone without an engineering degree, even if in both cases the person is as skilled as someone with a degree (I expect lawyers would be in the same basket as doctors here).
At least, that would be my answer to “why Thiel assumes a “standard” education is useful for doctors but dismisses it for other specializations.”
Sorry. I’ve slept on this, and I still don’t see the relevance of lawsuits.
Thiel says: “For some people, such as future doctors, the time and cost of four years of college may be worth it.” That statement isn’t about the people who hire future doctors, who can cover their collective asses by ensuring they have someone who has the proper sanction from the state. It isn’t about the clients of future doctors either, or any other stakeholder population who might prefer that doctors hold a degree.
The statement is about the doctors, and what would be worthwhile to them.
If we compare the education/career paths:
A) Go to medical school, become a doctor
B) Go to college, study engineering or business or whatnot, then work in a tech company or even start one yourself
C) Drop out and just start a company straight away
… then the same kind of people might be interested in B) and C), and for them, C) might be better than B). For doctors, there is no equivalent to C) (I don’t think you can really be a “freelance doctor” without any degree). The path to ‘Doctor’ goes through A) only, the path to ‘Tech Entrepreneur’ goes through both B) and C) (The path to “Lawyer” isn’t very branchy either).
Though if you mean, it may still be better for some people who were considering medical school to drop that and go do something else, then I don’t disagree, I don’t know enough about the advantages of various careers.
(I’m having trouble figuring out whether we are disagreeing, and if so, about what)
You can’t, but basically I’m wondering whether Thiel means that as the only reason why “the time and cost of four years of college may be worth it”, or if he also thinks that the educational value justifies it.
Well, of course it depends on what it is about being a doctor I value. If I want to help sick people become healthy, for example, there are lots of equivalents to C.
Admittedly, the most effective ones don’t involve practicing medicine, which falls into the “go do something else” category. But even if I what I want is to help sick people become healthy by practicing medicine, there are still equivalents to C—there are plenty of areas full of sick people who can be helped to become healthy through the practice of medicine without a degree.
There just isn’t a lot of status or money in doing that.
Note that a fair bit of the six or seven years of medical school is internship or case studies, so the “learning on the job” bit blurs with the university learning.
Also, the main point of medical school in particular, and many university courses in general, is not the learning, but the certificate at the end to prove that you know stuff and have experience.