Should I Go By "Doctor"?

[-Peacemaker-]

I think it depends on where you got your 'doctorate'. If you got it from an online program or some unaccredited school I think you should refrain from calling yourself 'doctor'.

 

[Eliab ben Benjamin]

Makes me smile and brings to mind an amusing event at the hospital i work at.
I was chatting with some Dr's over a problem with a ventilator when a "Suit" arrived
and asked to speak to Dr Tu-----, i looked around for who may share my surname,
feeling somewhat foolish when i realized i was the person asked for....

(i have 3 PhDs and a couple masters, but seldom used the titles, being the mad
scientist employed to maintain life support equipment)

 

[Neo Deist]

If you got it from an online program or some unaccredited school I think you should refrain from calling yourself 'doctor'.

In the USA, that creates an issue. Under the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution (Bill of Rights) you will find the freedom of religion. Federal courts have already ruled that religious institutions are not subject to government oversight or regulation. Those institutions can legally decide on their own course curriculum for religious degrees, and those degrees do in fact award legal titles (doctor). The same courts went on to say that the individual states can determine whether or not they recognize degrees from religious institutions. Some states do not recognize those degrees while others do. The more conservative, southern, "Bible Belt" states typically do recognize them, even if they do not come from an accredited institution.

Furthermore, many bible colleges/seminaries are small and locally funded by a church. For them to pay the fees to become regionally or nationally accredited would drive their tuition costs through the roof. They cite the 1st Amendment, and remain non-accredited. It is up to the individual to find out if his/her state, employer, etc. accept a degree from a non-accredited institution. Also, another reason many do not become accredited is because the students typically do not transfer to another institution, opting to finish everything "in house," all the way through a doctorate program.

Tuition at a non-accredited institution is often MUCH less than other universities. Some are even completely free. Once again, they cite the examples of the government such as the military academies like West Point and Annapolis. Those academies do not charge the students a single dime. Repayment is done through military service. The same principle applies to religious institutions that receive repayment through ministry service from the graduates.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

In the USA, that creates an issue. Under the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution (Bill of Rights) you will find the freedom of religion. Federal courts have already ruled that religious institutions are not subject to government oversight or regulation. Those institutions can legally decide on their own course curriculum for religious degrees, and those degrees do in fact award legal titles (doctor). The same courts went on to say that the individual states can determine whether or not they recognize degrees from religious institutions. Some states do not recognize those degrees while others do. The more conservative, southern, "Bible Belt" states typically do recognize them, even if they do not come from an accredited institution.

Furthermore, many bible colleges/seminaries are small and locally funded by a church. For them to pay the fees to become regionally or nationally accredited would drive their tuition costs through the roof. They cite the 1st Amendment, and remain non-accredited. It is up to the individual to find out if his/her state, employer, etc. accept a degree from a non-accredited institution. Also, another reason many do not become accredited is because the students typically do not transfer to another institution, opting to finish everything "in house," all the way through a doctorate program.

Tuition at a non-accredited institution is often MUCH less than other universities. Some are even completely free. Once again, they cite the examples of the government such as the military academies like West Point and Annapolis. Those academies do not charge the students a single dime. Repayment is done through military service. The same principle applies to religious institutions that receive repayment through ministry service from the graduates.

Hehehe... In other words you got from an unaccredited school. I personally wouldn't call myself 'doctor' under those circumstances. Did you at least have to go to class or was it all online?

 

[Neo Deist]

Hehehe... In other words you got from an unaccredited school. I personally wouldn't call myself 'doctor' under those circumstances. Did you at least have to go to class or was it all online?

Online, which included pdf textbooks, audio lectures, video conferencing, research, essays, a thesis and a dissertation. It was the same amount of work minus driving to school and sitting at an uncomfortable desk all day.

Many universities that are accredited now offer distance learning. They increase their profit/revenue without having to have larger classrooms. With my hectic schedule/family life, it was an easy choice.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It is a bit much to write this for a name: Rev. Dr. Christopher XXX, Th.D., D.D.

True. Lol.

I think the suffix imo is just fine for most occassions. It serves well and looks good I think.

At the end of the day still, nothing beats just using your name when all is said and done. After all, it's the person that's importaint, not the title. =0)

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Online, which included pdf textbooks, audio lectures, video conferencing, research, essays, a thesis and a dissertation. It was the same amount of work minus driving to school and sitting at an uncomfortable desk all day.

Many universities that are accredited now offer distance learning. They increase their profit/revenue without having to have larger classrooms. With my hectic schedule/family life, it was an easy choice.

I think the most respectable thing to do is just take the knowledge you got from the program and avoid telling people anything about where you got it. Almost everybody is going to roll their eyes when you tell them what kind of school you went to. Let your knowledge and whatever skill you received from your studies speak for itself

 

[Twilight Hue]

Online, which included pdf textbooks, audio lectures, video conferencing, research, essays, a thesis and a dissertation. It was the same amount of work minus driving to school and sitting at an uncomfortable desk all day.

Many universities that are accredited now offer distance learning. They increase their profit/revenue without having to have larger classrooms. With my hectic schedule/family life, it was an easy choice.

Even accreditation can be suspect. I'm not saying it's necessarily here in this case, yet there are now a growing number of independent accreditation institutions that are not as cut and dry in itself.

Being a religious themed degree, I don't think it's overly an issue if it's identified as a particular religious branch responsible for accreditation among its own participants but can be problematic if it's passed on as general academics, par among major universities and learning institutions.

A good litmus test is reading published material that's peer reviewed from various institutions which provides a very good perspective.

I don't think online is all bad in respect to what is being taught. I can see degrees like religion or philosophy going in that direction. Even accounting, which is largely textual. The issues lie primarily with interaction, for which online cannot provide field work or practible real world experiences essential for a well rounded education. Online can be touch and go when real world elements are omitted leaving those hands on experiences after the degree is awarded.

It's really forming a matter of opinion as to the quality of candidates from online and campus graduates when they actually engage in their prospective fields after the studying is all said and done. Only time will tell as to weither any differences become apparant.

At any rate, it does sound like you worked hard for it, and the best wishes possible as you engage in your chosen field of study or practice.

 

[Willamena]

You should get them to call you "Mister."


Or "Mister Doctor."

 

[buddhist]

A "Doctor" is legally a title within the organization he or she received that title from which denotes the bearer's relative rank within that organization's internal hierarchy. Other uses of that title, or acceptance of that title, outside of the issuing organization is simply an extension of courtesy. The same goes for any other title, including titles such as "Lieutenant", "Mister" (yes, also a legal title), "Vice President", etc.

 

[serp777]

Doctor of theology? Sorry that's a joke. Doctor is reserved for a man of science in my submission. Theology hasn't contributed much of anything to human civilization in the last 500 years, besides arguably art and culture if you're being generous. It really hasn't contributed anything functionally useful--like saving lives or feeding people or curing cancer, which is the kind of stuff real doctors work on.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

In the USA, that creates an issue. Under the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution (Bill of Rights) you will find the freedom of religion. Federal courts have already ruled that religious institutions are not subject to government oversight or regulation. Those institutions can legally decide on their own course curriculum for religious degrees, and those degrees do in fact award legal titles (doctor). The same courts went on to say that the individual states can determine whether or not they recognize degrees from religious institutions. Some states do not recognize those degrees while others do. The more conservative, southern, "Bible Belt" states typically do recognize them, even if they do not come from an accredited institution.

Furthermore, many bible colleges/seminaries are small and locally funded by a church. For them to pay the fees to become regionally or nationally accredited would drive their tuition costs through the roof. They cite the 1st Amendment, and remain non-accredited. It is up to the individual to find out if his/her state, employer, etc. accept a degree from a non-accredited institution. Also, another reason many do not become accredited is because the students typically do not transfer to another institution, opting to finish everything "in house," all the way through a doctorate program.

Tuition at a non-accredited institution is often MUCH less than other universities. Some are even completely free. Once again, they cite the examples of the government such as the military academies like West Point and Annapolis. Those academies do not charge the students a single dime. Repayment is done through military service. The same principle applies to religious institutions that receive repayment through ministry service from the graduates.

The fact that there might be good reasons for an institution to decide not to pursue accreditation doesn't get rid of the problem that the academic quality of the program at an unaccredited institution can really be suspect.

Accreditation gives some assurances about the quality of the institution. When there's no accreditation, there's no assurance. Sure, it can be possible for an unaccredited institution to be high quality, but how could you be sure? An average potential student (or employer considering how to weight an applicant's degree) isn't in the position to do the sort of rigorous review that comes with the accreditation process.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

In the Uk you would be Reverend doctor in religious academic or official circles.
To your flock this would be as you wish, pastor, father or what ever your church calls its priest informally.

In academic circles all people with a Phd are referenced as doctor. Or by their position eg professor.

 

[buddhist]

Accreditation or non-accreditation has no bearing on the OP's original question.

There is nothing inherently wrong with either accreditation or non-accreditation. In terms of non-accreditation, the responsibility of verifying the program of study lies in the hands of those creating the program, and those who undertake that program of study. In terms of accreditation, it simply shifts the responsibility of verifying the program of study to an external entity.

Either can be questionable. An "accredited" program is not automatically "good", nor is an "unaccredited" program automatically bad.

 

[Shiranui117]

Although I did finish seminary in June and earned a Doctorate of Theology (Th.D.), I have been telling people not to call me doctor, especially outside of the Church. Some people refuse that request and always call me Doctor...I am assuming a respect thing.

Should people who earn a religious doctorate go by the title of "doctor"? Please share your thoughts/opinions.

Yes, because then I can say things like "Eeeeaahhh, what's up Doc?"

 

[George-ananda]

Although I did finish seminary in June and earned a Doctorate of Theology (Th.D.), I have been telling people not to call me doctor, especially outside of the Church. Some people refuse that request and always call me Doctor...I am assuming a respect thing.

Should people who earn a religious doctorate go by the title of "doctor"? Please share your thoughts/opinions.

I think we should have more specific labels; medical doctor, PhD, doctor of theology. etc.. Just the term 'doctor' is usually assumed to be a medical doctor. So I think just going by the title 'Dr.' will mislead people.

 

[Neo Deist]

I think we should have more specific labels; medical doctor, PhD, doctor of theology. etc.. Just the term 'doctor' is usually assumed to be a medical doctor. So I think just going by the title 'Dr.' will mislead people.

That is why the Church labels me as Rev. Dr.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think we should have more specific labels; medical doctor, PhD, doctor of theology. etc.. Just the term 'doctor' is usually assumed to be a medical doctor. So I think just going by the title 'Dr.' will mislead people.

Anyone I know who has a doctorate but isn't an MD either goes by "professor" (if that's their title) or *name*, PhD.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Accreditation or non-accreditation has no bearing on the OP's original question.

There is nothing inherently wrong with either accreditation or non-accreditation. In terms of non-accreditation, the responsibility of verifying the program of study lies in the hands of those creating the program, and those who undertake that program of study. In terms of accreditation, it simply shifts the responsibility of verifying the program of study to an external entity.

Either can be questionable. An "accredited" program is not automatically "good", nor is an "unaccredited" program automatically bad.

It's related to the OP to the extent that "doctor" is a term of respect, and the amount of respect due to the institution and the program of study of the person holding the doctorate degree.

In an extreme example, take Kent Hovind's PhD: I've read his dissertation. IMO, he has no business calling himself a doctor of anything. This is despite him holding a PhD from Patriot Bible University.

Now... I don't tar all unaccredited schools with the same brush as Patriot Bible University, but I do reserve judgement on the respect due to a person's degree until I know what sort of program they had to complete to get it. I wouldn't call someone a doctor if I don't think their degree passes muster, even if they have a framed piece of paper with "Doctor of Philosophy" or "Doctor of Theology" on it.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

Although I did finish seminary in June and earned a Doctorate of Theology (Th.D.), I have been telling people not to call me doctor, especially outside of the Church. Some people refuse that request and always call me Doctor...I am assuming a respect thing.

Should people who earn a religious doctorate go by the title of "doctor"? Please share your thoughts/opinions.

A doctorate is theology is very impressive, embrace it. It's humbling that you try and avoid that label as most doctors I've met love being labeled as such.