Can a mystic be a good physician?

[BRG253]

"There is only one state that fulfills the mystic's longing for infinity, non-causality, non-identity: death. No matter what unintelligible causes he ascibes to his incommunicable feelings, whoever rejects reality rejects existence--and the feelings that move him from then on are hatred for all the values of man's life, and lust for all the evils that destory it. A mystic relishes the spectacle of suffering, of poverty, subservience and terror; these give him a feeling of triumph, a proof of the defeat of rational reality. But no other reality exists."

Several years ago, I got mixed up with a terrible hack of a podiatrist. The results of my affiliation with him were catastrophic. While under his care, I got the impression that he actually wanted me to be debilitated and dependent. He seemed to be opposed to the concept of being healthy, strong, and able to exist without podiatric treatment. He would occasionally make references to God and the Bible, but not being philosophically grounded at the time, I didn't think anything of it. It was one of many warning signs that I should have picked up on.

So my question is - is it possible for a mystic to be a good physician, or does his orientation automatically make him malevolent, as the above passage suggests? When I speak of a mystic, I mean a real mystic, as in a Bible literalist or something along those lines.

Edited November 21, 2009 by BRG253

[MoralParadise]

Several years ago, I got mixed up with a terrible hack of a podiatrist. The results of my affiliation with him were catastrophic. While under his care, I got the impression that he actually wanted me to be debilitated and dependent. He seemed to be opposed to the concept of being healthy, strong, and able to exist without podiatric treatment. He would occasionally make references to God and the Bible, but not being philosophically grounded at the time, I didn't think anything of it. It was one of many warning signs that I should have picked up on.

So my question is - is it possible for a mystic to be a good physician, or does his orientation automatically make him malevolent, as the above passage suggests? When I speak of a mystic, I mean a real mystic, as in a Bible literalist or something along those lines.

It depends what you mean by good physician and what degree of mysticism he practices. Obviously he cannot be completely mystical, or else God would do everything for him. Please do not get in the habit of taking a literal interpretation of these labels, because everyone has to be rational during some times, and the more successful people are rational more often, or rather all the time. There are surgeons who are mystical, in that they believe in some god. It depends on what their job entails and the degree of their mysticism. If they are trained in a procedure and can repeat it, I guess that makes them a good doctor. But if they want to do research and learn new things, they may not be the best knowledge seekers for their answers lie in reality and not in some esoteric power. Nikola Tesla was a mystic in that degree I am pretty sure, and he invented quite a bit of things, namely AC current. I would not make a blanket statement saying that everyone who believes in god are bad doctors, though I would sure feel more comfortable with one who had my life in his hands who did not believe in god. A doctor is no different than anyone else, except they require more specialized knowledge. There are probably many doctors who are medical school fundamentalists and take everything they are taught without question, that are even more dangerous than god worshipping doctors that do not do that. I would recommend reasoning along these lines instead of trying to incorporate all of your judgments of reality in a box that you did not integrate to start with. I used to do this.

Edited November 21, 2009 by MoralParadise

[Thales]

Several years ago, I got mixed up with a terrible hack of a podiatrist. The results of my affiliation with him were catastrophic. While under his care, I got the impression that he actually wanted me to be debilitated and dependent. He seemed to be opposed to the concept of being healthy, strong, and able to exist without podiatric treatment. He would occasionally make references to God and the Bible, but not being philosophically grounded at the time, I didn't think anything of it. It was one of many warning signs that I should have picked up on.

So my question is - is it possible for a mystic to be a good physician, or does his orientation automatically make him malevolent, as the above passage suggests? When I speak of a mystic, I mean a real mystic, as in a Bible literalist or something along those lines.

If he practices medicine on the basis of science and not mysticism, he will probably fine. However, if he is not engaged in medicine on a scientific basis, if he is using religion, then he would necessarily be awful.

I'm guessing the guy who was treating you wasn't that bad, because I think he would be found out rather quickly by his patients.

[BRG253]

If he practices medicine on the basis of science and not mysticism, he will probably fine. However, if he is not engaged in medicine on a scientific basis, if he is using religion, then he would necessarily be awful.

I'm guessing the guy who was treating you wasn't that bad, because I think he would be found out rather quickly by his patients.

I recently learned that he's been sued four times for malpractice....

[Hotu Matua]

I practiced Medicine for some years. Now I work exclusively in clinical research for a pharmaceutical company.

In those years I was a mystical.

Mystical patients demand a mystical physician.

In a country like Mexico, this makes a "perfect fit". Mystical Physicians and mystical patients engage in a relationship of co-dependency. Physicians need patients to feel they are a sort of loving god, and patients need to have a doctor that pretends to love them.

In many instances, physicians are a kind of priests armed with technical knowledge. And it works in those societies for some diseases that require a short-term therapeutic approach.

Certainly, the sucess is limited by the own nature of mysticism and irrationality of this doctor-patient relationship. Eventualy, patient autonomy and self-reliance is needed in many diseases to comply with long-term treatments, change lifestyles, question your doctor's abilty and acknowledge accountability for yourr own health.

Having changed into clinical research, I find now that the whole concept of research in human beings demands autonomy from paient, and an objective mindset from both doctor and patient.

That is why the informed consent process is so different in Latin America compared with the process in USA.

But I might talk about it in other thread or time.