#1 ·
On a separate thread, we have been engaged in a rather pointed debate regarding whether a physician—or perhaps a priest—is actually required to possess firsthand, lived experience in the very matters they seek to treat or counsel.
I urge you all to read this carefully and contribute to a discussion that affects every single one of us.
I have been reflecting on your response, and I find myself struck by its profound depth. It is subtle, nuanced, and quite frankly, revolutionary in its insight.
It is perfectly clear that you are advocating for a superior standard of care for patients; you believe that psychiatrists, physicians, pediatricians, and psychologists should possess more than just a degree or some theoretical "flight simulator" training—they ought to have genuine, lived experience to draw upon.
If one were to actually apply your logic and follow the spirit of your proposal, we would witness a complete renaissance in our quality of life.
Psychiatry 😵
One must maintain that individuals tasked with treating schizophrenia or manic depression should not be permitted to do so unless they have personally endured the weight of mental illness themselves, or at the very least, have had to navigate the complexities of such a struggle within their own immediate family.
Gynecology:
Let us entertain a hypothetical scenario where one finds themselves grappling with some sort of fundamental issue regarding their... shall we say, biological hardware.
I completely understand your position; based on consumer protection laws and the core intent behind your proposal, you are essentially demanding that a medical facility ensure any gynecologist performing an exam possesses actual sexual experience. Should you decide to establish an association—let's call it the W.O.M.E.N. Foundation—dedicated to verifying the sexual history of practitioners, you could quite literally propose that inexperienced doctors be required to wear a yellow star. This would serve to distinguish them from seasoned professionals who possess the necessary tactile familiarity through direct contact, both externally and internally, with the vulva.
Your Gnostic, experiential approach to reasoning would likely fascinate most of the male population, potentially serving to improve interpersonal dynamics between men and women on a global scale. 😍
Let us entertain a hypothetical scenario involving a man grappling with issues related to his anatomy—specifically, what one might call the phallus. If we are to follow the logic of modern progressive movements, which insist that women deserve access to a Gynecologist who is sexually liberated and uninhibited, then it stands to reason that men should be entitled to the same. Specifically, men should have the right to consult a highly specialized sexologist whose expertise has been honed through postgraduate studies in the adult film industry. To truly honor the spirit of the Hippocratic Oath, an experienced physician should be able to administer oral therapy right there in the exam room, providing immediate relief to the vast majority of the male population. 🙂
If the Gnostic-esoteric logic you used to conclude that a priest should refrain from counseling those already in marriages or committed relationships were actually applied, it would trigger a total revolution in both pediatrics and national population policy.
Every single one. Pediatrician One would presume that having children of one's own is a fundamental prerequisite for anyone aspiring to practice pediatrics; otherwise, how could one possibly claim the authority to treat the offspring of others?
Psychologists ought to be required to display certificates confirming they have survived their own neuroses on their office walls; after all, how can a psychologist maintain any shred of credibility if they haven't personally navigated depression or some form of obsessive-compulsive disorder?
Your logic, aimed squarely at your favorite target—the clergy—has effectively exposed the hypocrisy inherent in the entire medical profession!
How do these doctors even dare to treat illnesses when they haven't personally endured tuberculosis, AIDS, hemorrhoids, herpes, or syphilis?
Following the spirit of your critique—just as priests wear white collars, thereby marking themselves as inexperienced and unfit to provide psychological or counseling support to people—we should similarly label inexperienced psychiatrists, psychologists, marriage counselors... and Gynecologists.
That way, we would know which psychiatrist is struggling with their own issues 😵, which Gynecologist is sexually active and which is not.
A Gynecologist who is a virgin should perhaps wear a clearly visible pin featuring a small, pale penis, whereas a sexually active Gynecologist should proudly sport a pink rose symbol. 🆙
A marriage counselor who lacks certification proving she has survived domestic violence shouldn't be allowed to advise married couples. If she wears a blue ribbon on her lapel, we will know that such a woman truly understands what life is about.
A pediatrician without children must be clearly identified, because how is it possible for our children to be treated by doctors who don't have children themselves? After all, children 🙂 are our greatest treasure!
I congratulate you on this revolutionary idea. You have completely unmasked the hypocrisy of countless professions that, despite lacking lived experience, still presume to help us mere mortals—people who, under consumer protection laws, have a right to doctors and soul-searchers marked by yellow, red, white, blue, or black collars to denote their expertise.
As the pioneer of this new school of thought, I suggest you wear an inverted funnel on your hat; that way, the rest of us will recognize the authors of the most "brilliant" suggestions for improving the quality of life, allowing us to admire them, draw inspiration from them, and attempt to reach such a comprehensively professional and applicable form of gnosticism. 🙏
I urge you all to read this carefully and contribute to a discussion that affects every single one of us.
Nemruth Dag said:It stands to reason, then, that anyone capable of engaging with others—individuals who feel comfortable enough to be truly vulnerable and open up regardless of the circumstances—possesses a certain inherent value. I am not in possession of such things. The fundamental issue lies in the fact that ZNA possesses a far more extensive theoretical understanding of the subject matter than they could ever possibly acquire through actual lived experience.
I find myself wondering how psychologists, therapists, psychiatrists, and the entire spectrum of mental health professionals would even begin to process this. These are individuals trained specifically to listen to the narratives of others while simultaneously navigating their own complex realities. If we strip away the context of their lived experiences, how could we possibly interpret the weight of their advice or the true depth of their expertise?🤷
It is quite frankly absurd to consider that a pilot might spend a single hour actually sitting in a cockpit before they have already logged countless hours navigating through simulated environments on the ground.😂
I have been reflecting on your response, and I find myself struck by its profound depth. It is subtle, nuanced, and quite frankly, revolutionary in its insight.
It is perfectly clear that you are advocating for a superior standard of care for patients; you believe that psychiatrists, physicians, pediatricians, and psychologists should possess more than just a degree or some theoretical "flight simulator" training—they ought to have genuine, lived experience to draw upon.
If one were to actually apply your logic and follow the spirit of your proposal, we would witness a complete renaissance in our quality of life.
Psychiatry 😵
One must maintain that individuals tasked with treating schizophrenia or manic depression should not be permitted to do so unless they have personally endured the weight of mental illness themselves, or at the very least, have had to navigate the complexities of such a struggle within their own immediate family.
Gynecology:
Let us entertain a hypothetical scenario where one finds themselves grappling with some sort of fundamental issue regarding their... shall we say, biological hardware.
I completely understand your position; based on consumer protection laws and the core intent behind your proposal, you are essentially demanding that a medical facility ensure any gynecologist performing an exam possesses actual sexual experience. Should you decide to establish an association—let's call it the W.O.M.E.N. Foundation—dedicated to verifying the sexual history of practitioners, you could quite literally propose that inexperienced doctors be required to wear a yellow star. This would serve to distinguish them from seasoned professionals who possess the necessary tactile familiarity through direct contact, both externally and internally, with the vulva.
Your Gnostic, experiential approach to reasoning would likely fascinate most of the male population, potentially serving to improve interpersonal dynamics between men and women on a global scale. 😍
Let us entertain a hypothetical scenario involving a man grappling with issues related to his anatomy—specifically, what one might call the phallus. If we are to follow the logic of modern progressive movements, which insist that women deserve access to a Gynecologist who is sexually liberated and uninhibited, then it stands to reason that men should be entitled to the same. Specifically, men should have the right to consult a highly specialized sexologist whose expertise has been honed through postgraduate studies in the adult film industry. To truly honor the spirit of the Hippocratic Oath, an experienced physician should be able to administer oral therapy right there in the exam room, providing immediate relief to the vast majority of the male population. 🙂
If the Gnostic-esoteric logic you used to conclude that a priest should refrain from counseling those already in marriages or committed relationships were actually applied, it would trigger a total revolution in both pediatrics and national population policy.
Every single one. Pediatrician One would presume that having children of one's own is a fundamental prerequisite for anyone aspiring to practice pediatrics; otherwise, how could one possibly claim the authority to treat the offspring of others?
Psychologists ought to be required to display certificates confirming they have survived their own neuroses on their office walls; after all, how can a psychologist maintain any shred of credibility if they haven't personally navigated depression or some form of obsessive-compulsive disorder?
Your logic, aimed squarely at your favorite target—the clergy—has effectively exposed the hypocrisy inherent in the entire medical profession!
How do these doctors even dare to treat illnesses when they haven't personally endured tuberculosis, AIDS, hemorrhoids, herpes, or syphilis?
Following the spirit of your critique—just as priests wear white collars, thereby marking themselves as inexperienced and unfit to provide psychological or counseling support to people—we should similarly label inexperienced psychiatrists, psychologists, marriage counselors... and Gynecologists.
That way, we would know which psychiatrist is struggling with their own issues 😵, which Gynecologist is sexually active and which is not.
A Gynecologist who is a virgin should perhaps wear a clearly visible pin featuring a small, pale penis, whereas a sexually active Gynecologist should proudly sport a pink rose symbol. 🆙
A marriage counselor who lacks certification proving she has survived domestic violence shouldn't be allowed to advise married couples. If she wears a blue ribbon on her lapel, we will know that such a woman truly understands what life is about.
A pediatrician without children must be clearly identified, because how is it possible for our children to be treated by doctors who don't have children themselves? After all, children 🙂 are our greatest treasure!
I congratulate you on this revolutionary idea. You have completely unmasked the hypocrisy of countless professions that, despite lacking lived experience, still presume to help us mere mortals—people who, under consumer protection laws, have a right to doctors and soul-searchers marked by yellow, red, white, blue, or black collars to denote their expertise.
As the pioneer of this new school of thought, I suggest you wear an inverted funnel on your hat; that way, the rest of us will recognize the authors of the most "brilliant" suggestions for improving the quality of life, allowing us to admire them, draw inspiration from them, and attempt to reach such a comprehensively professional and applicable form of gnosticism. 🙏