It has always bothered me that we call the Ph.D. by the same title as the M.D. Why is this? It seems to me it cheapens the value and respect we give to medical doctors. I WAG that way back medical doctors were only called physicians, and perhaps the doctor title was only for Ph.Ds? Somehow, as education progressed, the two became one? (Just a WAG.) So, what’s the factual history on these two titles? Ultimately, you mean we couldn’t think up another title for Ph. D. folks?
A Doctor of Philosophy (PhD or DPhil) is a type of doctorate degree awarded by universities in many countries.
CMC fnord!
The word “doctor” is Latin for “teacher”. In ye olde historical times (at least in Western culture) the title was used to mean a well respected and distinguished teacher. The term later got applied to advanced degrees like Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) or Doctor of Medicine (MD). So they both come from the same origin.
Physicians became “doctors” when folks started requiring a doctorate-level degree in order for someone to become a licensed physician.
Doctor means teacher. One could argue that PhDs are somewhat more deserving of the title since they tend to be more associated with academic institutions. In the UK, surgeons were traditionally called Mister instead of Doctor, a distinction they were proud of.
And finally, I was in a philosophy class in my youth and the professor asked the whereabouts of a missing student. When another student replied he had a doctor’s appointment, the professor said, “Am I not also a doctor? Perhaps you mean the physician?”.
From WIkipedia
We use the academic title “Doctor” and we have since Medival times. I wasn’t originally applied to a barber-surgeon. Why the person you go to for the sniffles who tells you, “Drink fluids.” gets to pretend they’re an academic is the problem.
OK, I’m kidding Doctors. You also get to prescribe drugs and play a mean game of golf.
Still kidding. Relax.
Jinx, you have to have been on the SDMB long enough to know that words sometimes change meanings over time. But consider this, there was a time when the academic was the only learned person around. Doctor of philosophy, or Doctor of theology, if you have a complicated logic problem, who’re you going to ask. The Doctor is the only literate person in town. They spend all day reading, they must have picked up diverse facts, and be able to recall and use them. Yes even to ask them a health issue. Ever Google for a health question? What makes it noble to get advice from a web page?
Ever hear of Dr. Who, a time traveling, not too snappy dressed, wisecracking alien? He travels through time and space, he seems to have a plan for the worst situations at his fingertips every time. If you have a sore throat, why not ask him for help? So he’s a different species, he probably read a medical book or two. Why? 'Cause he’s the Doctor.
He claims to have studied in Glasgow under Joseph Lister. So he might have a legitimate claim to the title as a medico as well. 
In the United States, in the mid-1800s, several universities changed the schooling for becoming a lawyer. Previously, lawyers got bachelors degrees, these were “first degrees”. But when a more formalized study for becoming a lawyer was initiated, and required that a student first obtain a bachelors before undertaking that study, these universities decided that a doctoral degree was necessary, in equity to other post-graduate students. The degree derived was the J.D. (Juris Doctor, or teacher of law).
Not shockingly, pushback began almost at once to the idea of addressing the common attorney as “Doctor So-and-so”. In general, this was headed off by states passing rules affecting lawyers, precluding them from using that honorific for themselves. So, I have a doctoral degree of sorts, but I’ve never been called “Doctor Young” by anyone because of it.
So much is made of this unimportant distinction. Both PhDs and medical doctors have years of study.
“Doctor” as the title for the holder of the Ph.D. is older than the same word as the title for a physician. And its use for physicians has nothing to do with the fact that the professional medical degree is a doctorate; it was being so used before that was the case, and it’s used in countries where that is still not the case. The M.D. professional degree was first awarded by Scottish universities in the early eighteenth century, but “doctor” as an honorific for a physician goes back to the fourteenth century.
“Doctor” for a physician is an example of title inflation. They were trying to claim parity of professional esteem with senior academics, senior churchmen and senior lawyers, all of whom did have actual doctorates, and used the associated title. From the strict academic sense of the word emerged a wider sense of somebody highly qualified by study in a particular field (as opposed to practice/experience in that field), even if the study didn’t lead to an actual doctorate. The physicians fell on this with enthusiasm.
Why not just as well say calling MDs “doctor” cheapens the value and respect we give to PhDs? Why the tilt to saying that one deserves respect beyond the other?
But, eh. A degree’s just a bit of paper, a proxy about which too much fuss is made. I’d rather people didn’t base their respect upon it. (I say as I continue to faff about not writing, and considering once more re-abandoning, my own doctoral dissertation…)
If we changed the convention, what about all the jokes? Like when someone is reading Philosophical Investigations on an aircraft and is desperate to find a doctor to explain the more complex material; but finds that all three “doctors” on board only know how to treat a heart attack and perform an emergency tracheotomy, but know nothing of the later Wittgenstein’s view of language.
OTOH, physicians don’t get to call them selves “esquire.” 
That guy sounds like kind of a dick.
That’s Doctor Dick.
In the U.S., I think “Esquire” has always been a courtesy title like “Mister” available to any male. In the U.K. I think it is now treated similarly, although once it was available only in specific instances, such as
[ul]
[li] the eldest sons of knights and their eldest sons in perpetuity[/li][li] the eldest sons of younger sons of peers and their eldest sons in perpetuity[/li][li] esquires of knights constituted at their investiture[/li][li] person holding a military commission of Captain or higher[/li][li] persons assigned certain high ranks by the King, including Justice of the Peace (and Groom of the Stool :eek: )[/li][li] barristers (but not solicitors)[/li][li] chiefs of a clan, or lords of a manor[/li][li] foreign noblemen[/li][li] doctors of any faculty[/li][li] holders of an office, such as herald, entitled to wear a livery collar[/li][/ul]
Even the Royal family use it casually now. My eldest son* was invited to a party hosted at St James’s Palace by the Duke of York. His invite came in a Buckingham Palace envelope with his name followed by esquire. I’ve just checked, and the envelope is still pinned up on his wall!
- I am neither a knight or a peer, yet.
The basic problem is we have two type of academic award called “Doctor” which are very different. A Medical Doctor achieves that purely by course work, a standard GP does not do any original research to get their MD.
A Ph.D, is in theory at least supposed to be awarded for an original work for academic research that unique work that no one has done before, and so it advancing human knowledge in some way. (In theory, of course it doesn’t always work that way). In my mind, it’s MD’s who aren’t really worthy of the title Doctor, unless they are a researcher in medicine. But sure, it’s too late for that so we really should come up with a different title for a ‘Doctor by Research’, which should ideally have higher status than a ‘Doctor by Coursework’.
I come at that from another direction. A PhD has completed a dissertation and, at least theoretically, advanced the sum total of human knowledge. An M.D. is a tradesman. Granted, a highly skilled tradesman, but still not deserving of more respect than a PhD. A PhD is a “real” doctor, those MD titles are the imitations.
In the UK and Ireland, physicians do NOT have an academic doctorate on graduation.
In Ireland, they are conferred with MB, BAO, BCh: Bacholor of Medicine, Surgery and the Art of Obsterics.
In the UK, many graduate with MBBS, or Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery. I don’t know if some universities confer MBs also.
All doctors will end up earning postgraduate qualifications also, and many (most) specialists, and some primary care physicians will eventually get an MD, but it is an MD by research and equivalent to a PhD.
I do know some consultant physicians and surgeons, while highly qualified and Members or Fellows of the Irish and Royal Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons, and who have submitted vast amounts of original research to peer reviewed journals, who nevertheless never got around to doing a Doctorate per se.
Just to mention that, in a kind of reverse snobbery, Surgeons in the UK are called ‘mister’.
As the holder of a PhD, I’m with Jinx on this one. I think there are good reasons to distinguish medical doctors from others in everyday conversation – practical ones, like “Is there a doctor in the house?,” as well as recognizing the universally critical (we ALL have bodies that ALL fail in one way or another from time to time) and almost uniquely difficult-to-acquire knowledge (in that it is both broad and deep, and both theoretical and applied).
I don’t see this specialness with PhD-holders as a group (though I am in awe of certain almost-PhD mathematics experts ;)). I only call myself “Dr. Map” in interactions with students – and even then, it always feels funny to me – vaguely undeserved. I really just do it because my colleagues do, and it’s good to be consistent as a department.