Actscelerate.com

Aaron Scott

OTCP...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6032 **11/20/15 11:09 am**

Chet Atkins playfully gave out a Certified Guitar Player certificate to a few great guitarists.

There was NO ONE ON EARTH better qualified.

He never got a doctorate. Do you reckon he would still be among that best candidates to teach guitar to someone getting a degree in Music?

Yes.

Dr. Chet it is!

Old Time Country Preacher

Old Time Country Preacher · Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15564 **11/20/15 3:42 pm**

..................

c6thplayer1

Re: OTCP...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6385 **11/20/15 4:38 pm**

Aaron Scott

OTCP...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6032 **11/21/15 9:13 am**

My point was that if Chet Atkins was at the pinnacle and was awarded an honorary degree in music, you would laugh him to scorn if he called himself Dr. Atkins. Even if he was the best on earth, your limited view would remain that, "No, he cannot do that because he didn't attend an accredited college and pay for his degree."

I say that if you have the equivalent abilities (or more), then if you have an unaccredited degree or an honorary one, the ONLY real difference is that I didn't pay to get a degree from an accredited university. I don't have any problem with you preferring an accredited degree. My issue is with your dismissal of those who use doctor without an accredited degree. You imply that they are not nearly up to par. I say it is based on actual ability and accomplishment.

As for your medical doctor example, certainly I want someone highly skilled. But as you know, plenty of accredited doctors have massive malpractice suits against them. So it's not all about the degree, is it? It's about excellence.

So if I chose the doctor, but I had heard of someone who, never attending med school, had had unusual and significant success treating or operating, yeah, I'd be willing...especially if accredited doctors had failed.

Again, though, I fully acknowledge the utility of an accredited degree to give us some degree of comfort that this person has achieved a certain level of expertise. What I don't do is dismiss those with non-accredited degrees as being utterly unworthy of using the title of doctor. Just as I base my thinking about a persons intellect on their performance and such, I would do that for others that were exalted enough in their field to be worthy of an honorary degree.

Let me ask you a question.... Would you rather have an accredited doctor that had a D in his studies...or someone who has successfully done whatever you needed done numerous times with great success? Get back with me on that.

Aaron Scott

Some more thoughts...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6032 **11/21/15 6:08 pm**

There is no doubting that an accredited doctorate offers a level of comfort to those in need of someone with special expertise. I think we all would look for some sort of certification when we want expertise. It is, if nothing else, a signal that this person SHOULD have some reason for claiming expertise.

But it is not at all a guarantee. Nor can accredited doctorates claim to have some corner on all expertise. In fact, it is clear that they do not NEARLY have all--or even the best--of experts.

Using Chet Atkins (or, for OTCP's sake, David Gilmour) again, let me ask the simple question of whom you would rather take lesson from...Chet Atkins/David Gilmour...or someone with a doctorate in music, with a specialty in guitar?

If you're normal, I think almost all of us are going to prefer the undeniable genius of Atkins (and Gilmour to a lesser extent).

Now, if a UNIVERSITY wished to recognize that Chet Atkins was at the very, very top of his field in the area of guitar and wanted to award him an honorary doctorate in, say, music, that university would be well justified. After all, he would almost certainly know far more about guitar performance that ANY "Doctor of Guitar" on earth. And since the university recognized this, giving him an honorary doctorate, he would be justified in using it, I claim, not only because it was actually from a university, but also because, well, he was the best.

To look at it another way, consider that a person (at least in Florida) can take the GED and get a HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA. Not a GED certificate; a diploma. And all without going a day to high school!

Let's take it up a notch. Consider that a person can CLEP many classes on their way to a Bachelor degree. It stands to reason if one could, say, pass the Tripos at Cambridge without spending a day in college, that person would certainly be WORTHY of a Bachelor degree...and might even be awarded it by the university because of demonstrated ability.

Well, consider now that a university, having all sorts of experts at its disposal who make such decisions, decides that Chet Atkins has demonstrated a level of expertise in guitar performance that not only meet, but exceeds, the doctoral requirements. The university, in recognizing such, confers an honorary doctorate on Chet.

Now, remember, this is conferred by the university in recognition of extraordinary expertise that they deem equal or exceeded that of a doctoral candidate. (Yes, I know that most honorary degrees are not saying that, but go with me here...) Why is it that we can confer a GED without attending classes, a Bachelor without attending numerous classes (perhaps attending none at all), but we cannot confer a doctorate degree, apparently, even to the most deserving of persons????

Snobbishness?

Elitism?

Game playing?

Yes!

Again, it is recognized that honorary doctorates are usually not making such grand claims, but rather seek to honor a person who does demonstrate certain qualities worthy of the such a degree.

Further, it is HONORARY because, clearly, it is not earned the normal way (e.g., attending classes, writing a dissertation, say, etc.).

But the diploma and the Bachelor are not honorary, are they? And if not, and if the persons holding these credentials can use them, why do we shy away from the use of "doctor" if someone truly is at that level? And why should we take them to task for using a title that, surely--based on the prestige of many recipients--is well deserved?

There are honorary doctorates that are not deserved...and there are also accredited ones that are not deserved.

My point is that not to say that everyone who has an honorary doctorate is truly at the level of a doctor. I get that. My point is that we should not disparage someone from using a title that may be richly deserved. It's one thing to just snatch it out of thin air; it is another to have a university recognize your excellence in the field.

Old Time Country Preacher

Old Time Country Preacher · Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15564 **11/21/15 8:19 pm**

.................

Aaron Scott

OTCP...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6032 **11/21/15 9:14 pm**

No one is arguing that a person can arbitrarily call themselves "doctor." My argument is that an honorary or non-accredited degree can both signify extraordinary competence, contribution, and achievement in a given field. It can be presented (and does, at times) to those who are well above the actual holders of formal doctorates.

Let us suppose that a person has completed ALL studies and has provided a well-received dissertation...but has not yet paid for their studies. Thus, the doctorate is not conferred, EVEN THOUGH the person may far surpass the levels of any formal doctor in the field.

In your mind, they can NEVER be called a doctor until the bill is settled. In other words, it is ultimately not at all about the level of achievement and expertise, but SOLELY on whether the person actually completed that particular university's required course of studies.

But it gets worse....

Suppose that an accredited university had requirements far inferior to a non-accredited university's doctoral program (and that is entirely within the realm of possibility). You would STILL refuse to consider them a "real" doctor, even if they are far superior to the accredited school's doctoral students.

This is snobbish, clique-ish, and elitist to the nth degree.

The truth is that even if it is earned and superior, if it is from a non-accredited organization, you like to dismiss it.

Unless and until you can say that it is not competitive with the LEAST of the ACCREDITED programs whose doctorates you do deign to accept, quit mocking those who have them.

Your world revolves around it. How about using the time to either determine if it is deserved...or if the accredited doctor really had to endure the rigor you demand from those you call doctor?

Old Time Country Preacher

Old Time Country Preacher · Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15564 **11/21/15 9:50 pm**

....................

Aaron Scott

Here's the deal...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6032 **11/22/15 3:20 pm**

You snobbishly refuse to call a person doctor who has received a doctorate degree from a non-accredited university.

My brother, it is YOU who have bought into the mythology! You have believed that UNLESS a person has an ACCREDITED degree, then he/she is not worthy of a doctorate.

But as I have shown over and over, there are numerous examples of people who SURPASS the doctorate level of major universities, even though some of them have not even completed high school.

You have pre-determined that a man who received a doctorate from an unaccredited college does not deserve to be called doctor. But why? We all agree that an accredited degree, while it does give more utility, does not mean that one is better educated.

There is ONE BASIS that you "disqualify" people with: The fiction that an accredited doctorate degree is the only valid doctorate. Who told you that? I'm betting it was someone from an accredited school. HOW CONVENIENT!

I get that you have certain thoughts about this. But for you to call into question not only the scholarship but, really, the CHARACTER of men who have an unaccredited doctorate--perhaps after going through strenuous academic effort to obtain it--based on the fact that it is not accredited is snobbish, elitist, and wrong.

You would rather call someone "doctor" who is a complete moron that, by whatever method, got through an accredited college...than someone who is an academic giant that did not go to an accredited college. That's the mythology that you follow, whether you realize it or not.

Yes, a degree mill is one thing. An unaccredited college is another. One does it only for money; the latter simply has refused to accept that they are not legit unless they line up with Big Brother.

Consider that one day accreditation agencies might require that creation be taught as mythology in order for a college to be accredited. Now, NOT ONE THING WOULD CHANGE FROM YESTERDAY TO TODAY, but many colleges that are now accredited would lose that accreditation tomorrow.

Very simply, the SAME courses, the same teacher, the same requirements that gave last year's doctoral candidate a "fully valid" Ph.D, in your mind, would now, apparently, be largely worthless (in terms of you calling them a "doctor") since the school is no longer accredited.

Further, if you didn't bring it up every time there is a thread that uses the letter "e" in it, that would be one thing. But seeing as you do, I say that you are indeed an academic snob who, speaking of the scientific method, has failed to use it in determining whether a non-accredited doctor is worthy of the degree. You have taken as your dogma that an non-accredited doctorate does not make one worthy of the title.

Hmmm....

Cojak

01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011 Posts: 24275 **11/22/15 4:14 pm**

This is fun to read, even for a high School drop-out. Smile

_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/

Old Time Country Preacher

Old Time Country Preacher · Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15564 **11/22/15 4:38 pm**

.....................

Bishopinsc

Friendly Face Posts: 289 **11/22/15 5:02 pm**

Does anyone else hear the Lord's Words about pearls before swine echoing through this post.

To Clarify: the metaphorical swine is NOT OTCP!

Kind of sounds like somebody might have an unaccredited degree.
_________________
BiSC

bonnie knox

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 14803 **11/22/15 6:05 pm**

c6thplayer1

Thats It ... Here it comes

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6385 **11/22/15 6:32 pm**

Aaron Scott

Bishopinsc...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6032 **11/22/15 7:47 pm**

My bro, all of my degrees are from fully accredited colleges/universities.

I am just sticking up for good men who, despite having non-accredited doctorates, have demonstrated that they have the equivalent of any accredited doctorate.

Consider that there is, somewhere, the very worst accredited university in America. It's accredited, but it stinks.

And somewhere, there is a non-accredited school that is exceptional.

Now, IF IF IF (and OTCP doubts this could ever, ever, ever happen, but we are talking about the VERY WORST accredited university in America) IF, I repeat, that non-accredited doctorate required as much more more rigor, etc., than the accredited doctorate, then it stands to REASON that the non-accredited doctorate meet or exceeds even an accredited degree, right? And if so, and if the non-accredited school confers a doctorate, then it should be recognized.

OTCP is under the impression, apparently, that it CANNOT POSSIBLY be any good since it is not from an accredited school. What we can safely say is that, yes, the one from the accredited school will be better recognized and accepted anywhere. What we CANNOT say (or, rather, SHOULD not say, since someone is saying it anyway) is that the non-accredited degree is illegitimate, etc.

OTCP accept on faith that a person with a doctorate from an accredited school deserves the doctorate. But he refused to accept that a person from a non-accredited school deserves the title. Unless and until he has proven that it is NOT deserved, he should give recipients the benefit of the doubt, and not ASSUME that it is invalid just because of a lack of accreditation...since accreditation does not mean that a person clearly has received a superior education.

Bishopinsc

Friendly Face Posts: 289 **11/22/15 8:47 pm**

Bishopinsc

Friendly Face Posts: 289 **11/22/15 9:03 pm**

Brother Aaron:

I am willing to concede that there MAY be some excellent non-accredited schools and that there ARE some horrible accredited ones. But I am opposed to the unaccredited schools on principle. There are so many degree mills out there (a fact that has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt) that offer a "doctorate" or "degree" that is worthless because it signifies nothing but the gullibility of the buyer and his or her ability to pay. Accreditation offers some barrier against this type of hucksterism.

I don't know (and will not assume) if you have read any on the standards of accreditation or not. I have been doing some work recently dealing with the Northwestern accrediting body. I can tell you that accreditation DOES cost but that there are some very strict standards that must be me. IF the standards are not met, no amount of money can win an institution accreditation.

I did not say that your degrees were false (I don't know if you have any degrees); I said only that it sounded as if you were protesting a bit much not to have a horse in the race. For the false implication, I apologize.

BiSC
_________________
BiSC

bonnie knox

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 14803 **11/22/15 9:34 pm**

Old Time Country Preacher

Old Time Country Preacher · Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15564 **11/22/15 9:53 pm**

....................

Old Time Country Preacher

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15564 **11/22/15 9:54 pm**