Oregon

There are two components to a doctoral conferral.

One the one hand, there is the "credential" aspect. This has, historically, always been bound by jurisdiction. A degree from India, Iran, or South Carolina may or may not act as a teaching credential in State X, for any value of X. This has been, and always will be, the case. In this respect, Oregon's laws are entirely in keeping with US and international practice.

On the other hand, there is the metaphysical aspect of degree conferral. It is obvious to me that those of the "utility" camp have no clue what I am talking about when I mention this. A doctoral degree is like a marriage certificate, in that it signifies that the conferred has married the discipline, before the eyes of the amorphous international body of scholars. In this sense, a Ph.D. from India, Iran, or South Carolina is deemed to be a public declaration that the holder has married the discipline. In this respect, Oregon's laws intrude upon the jurisdiction of the international body of scholars -- in that they have assumed the role of that body by saying: "Whilst thou art in Oregon, thou shalt not use your title of marriage to the discipline, international body of scholars be damned."

Doctoral conferral cannot be removed. The moment that those from the international body of scholars call another doctorate holder "Dr." -- that person enters into history and into the future as a doctorate holder -- and no amount of haggling will change that. The title is not something that respects borders. "Hamid Surati, Ph.D." may not hold the credential to teach in a Canadian university -- but he is Dr. Surati, in the eyes of the IBS, nonetheless. This is outside the jurisdiction of nations and states.

For some brief moment, Surati was the absolute world authority on some narrow aspect of Iranonogy (understanding, of course, that "Surati" is a fictious name for the purposes of demonstration). This moment is fleeting -- someone else will take up that position ... and there is nothing that the ODA, the Queen of England, the Pope, John Bear, Steve Levicoff, "Sam Xavier", or anyone can do about that.

To require Surati, while in Oregon, to refrain from using his title in this metaphysical way -- is to assume that the state has more authority in this metaphysical matter than the IBS. The state has no such authority.

To require Surati to disclose his *credential* -- yes.

To require Surati to refrain from his title -- no.

A doctoral conferral is more than a credential.

 

Oregon has passed a law to the effect that a Ph.D. from CCU cannot be used when applying for a job in Oregon. (It doesn't matter whether the job is a teaching job or not. It is still illegal to use the degree.) Which do you consider this example, credential or metaphysical?

If the above example is considered credential then I guess we agree that Oregon is within their rights to have the law. If the above example is metaphysical then I have probably misunderstood your post and will need to read it again. My understanding is that Oregon's law has no impact on your metaphysical example.

 

That is clearly a case of "credential" -- and so, we agree there.

The representative of the ODA has stated, however, that:

As I interpret that statement, Oregon ODA has wandered into the metaphysical arena with the wording "enhances personal ... standing for some reason."

The credential aspect has a long history of precedent ... as can be determined here in BC by the number of Masters and Doctorate holders from foreign countries who drive taxi and deliver pizza because their degrees have little or no credential value here. Those taxi drivers and pizza delivery people are, however, entirely entitled to put their degrees in full view, and go by the title "Dr." -- and to enhance their "personal standing" in any setting where that is appropriate.

 

Okay when I reread your post I decided that I may disagree with this part. A Ph.D. wouldn't mean that Surati was the absolute world authority but that Surati was a world authority on some narrow aspect of Iranonogy and that Surati had made a significant contribution to mankind's knowledge of Iranonogy in this area.

 

I agree -- I should have included "significant contribution" in my defintion. I am a traditionalist in this regard, and my definition of "significant" is probably less loose than some disciplines permit. I am far too ignorant of far too many fields of knowledge to be able to comment on the significance of a contribution in most cases -- so I don't venture there if I can avoid it.

I believe the criteria listed here are pretty standard in the sciences, at least:

http://www.conknet.com/~mmagnus/Recommendation.html

These criteria are similar to the ones I have mentioned in the past.

 

My understanding is that the Taxi driver can hang his diploma anyplace that he wants to.

As a counter example though, say that the fellow is a counselor and he has a Ph.D. in psychology from CCU. This fellow cannot hang his diploma in his office where he meets his patients but he could hang it in his office at home.

I bet he could legally hang his diploma in his work office if he made sure whenever a patient saw the diploma he informed him/her that he's not using the degree in his practice because it is not a recognized degree in Oregon. To make sure that the ODA didn't put him on death row for illegal use of his unrecognized degree in this case though, it might be wise for him to have every patient sign a notarized statement that they were informed that the CCU degree is not being used in his practice because the degree is not recognized in Oregon and that he's displaying his diploma for purely metaphysical reasons.

 

I think that the fair application of the law would certainly have to be tested in a variety of circumstances ... some similar to the ones you have mentioned.

As they stand, the Oregon laws and list have been used in ways that involve casting of aspersions upon those who do not even live in Oregon. ("How does it make you feel to know that in Oregon, your degree is illegal for use?") Many states have laws that other states do not have. Felatio, "sodomy", belly button exposure, spitting on the sidewalk, blaspheming, and other such things -- are probably illegal in some state or another. Sometimes you might hear a Canadian say, upon doing something a bit off, "I wonder what state that is illegal in...."

Due and systematic process would certainly assist in increasing the credibility of Oregon's position: due process as regards how a university becomes listed on their famous list, for instance. (A published checklist, systematically and ubiquitously applied, with each institutions' checklist as much a matter of clear public record as the names of the institutions on the list themselves.) Clear wording as regards what constitutes "use" for "personal and professional enhancement."

In theory, on the credential level, Oregon has done nothing that every other jurisdiction on earth already does as regards degrees. In practice, it appears to be a gun that has gone off half-cocked, and this does nothing to further Oregon ODA's position. It kind of reminds me of when The Pre invited the Finnish track team to Oregon to compete ... sort of half seriously ... and almost lost his amateur status as an athlete as a result. In the "long run" -- (hehe...) it can be argued that Prefontaine's stance eventually resulted in changes for American amateur athletes, but in the short run -- it almost backfired.

(The Prefontaine analogy is not totally unfounded -- he did, after all, die in a car accident.)

 

This puts a whole new slant on the use of a CCU degree in California's northern neighbor state of Oregon.

Two guys on death row--talking.

Mass Murderer: Hey Mac, whatcha in for?

CCU Ph.D.: Unaccredited Ph.D.

MM: Where from?

Ph.D.: CCU

MM: Wow dude! The mans gonna fry you over that?

Ph.D.: Yes, I am afraid so.

MM: Hey man, I wonder if the electric chair guy got his electrician's license through an accredited school?

 

I agree with you that the international body of scholars has their own set of criteria to determine whether someone is truly “married” and should enter “into history and into the future as a doctorate holder.” In truth, however, the (as you put it) international body of scholars are themselves much more stringent than the ODA, and a legitimate accredited degree is the minimum entrance requirement. Therefore, the Oregon statutes don’t “intrude upon the jurisdiction of the international body of scholars” as these scholars are more than likely to not to regard anyone with a degree listed on the ODA site (whether they are in the state of Oregon or anywhere else) as a doctorate holder. (In fact, many of these scholars even have difficulty accepting the legitimacy of a non-residential degree.)

On the other hand, an individual can be highly respected as an authority in a particular field without a degree. Therefore, in regards to your fictional character, Surati might well be considered ”the absolute world authority" in a particular field, but would only be considered a doctoral holder if the degree was conferred by a legitimate institution. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

Although it is only as good as the granting institution, a degree does represent much more than just the credential. That is precisely why, when someone states that they went to an unaccredited school because they didn’t want to jump through the hoops or follow the rules that are normally required, they may receive a piece of paper that says they’re a doctoral holder, but it is devoid of what you termed the “metaphysical” component.

 

Two guys on death row -- talking.

Mass Murderer: Hey Mac, whatcha frying for?

Ph.D.: Unaccredited Ph.D.

Mass Murderer: How did they catch you?

Ph.D.: Some CCU Ph.D. squealled on me to cop a life sentence.

Mass Murderer: Man that is rough. They must have wanted you bad. Where's your degree from?

Ph.D.: Kennedy-Western University

Mass Murderer: Ugh, don't talk to me scum-bag.

 

Two guys on death row—talking. (Take 3)

Mass Murderer: Hey Mac, whatcha in for?

CCU Ph.D.: Unaccredited Ph.D.

MM: How’d they nab you?

Ph.D.: I got pulled over by an Oregon State Trooper for delivering pizza at 96 miles an hour in this Yugo taxicab. I explained that I was a doctor, and it was an emergency delivery to a body of international scholars. It seemed like he was going to let me off, but when I opened my wallet to show him my drivers license, out fell a picture of a couple of girls playing volleyball on the beach with a poodle. That’s when Officer McGillicutty busted me!

 

You speak with conviction on that, however, you have probably also gathered by now that I do not (often) write checks with my mouth that I cannot cash with my behind.

 

I admit to not being familiar with this particular saying. However, although I don’t think this was this was its intended meaning, it seems to imply that the output of one of your orifices is indistinguishable (or even superior, as most of us prefer cash to checks) from the output of the other. Egad!

 

To really get in touch with the metaphysical aspect of degree conferral get you degree from the University of Metaphysics. http://www.metaphysics.com

 

Oregon Schools

Oregon Schools are ok but they are inferior to Cal (go Bears )

 

Re: Oregon Schools

Perhaps that's why Dr. John Bear changed his last name to Bear, in honor of one of his most distinguished alma maters?

 

Re: Re: Oregon Schools

Actually, John changed his name to something which would articulate his aggressive pursuit of degree mills. When he hears the words DEGREE MILL he is transformed into a GRIZZLY BEAR and goes into the ATTACK MODE . Any other time he is as good natured as Gentle Ben

 

Re: Re: Re: Oregon Schools

A long time ago, in another millenium, I was in an officer training course.

In one section (squad) was someone named Bear. The sergeant would say "if you're going to be a bear, be a Grizzly" after which the section would make a loud growl.

The next day the sergeant repreated the process to which the next sergeant relied "if you're going to be a bear, be a Yogi" and the section gave a loud Hey, Hey Hey.

Maybe you had to be there.

 

I'm sorry to have to do this . . .

Having been in the past an Oregon resident for many years, and knowing well that it's not only legal still to carry weapons in a car (into an Air National Guard base, no less!), AND knowing that one can even still carry a six-shooter on their hip (old western laws die hard, you see), I'm afraid that I'll have to exercise this information and ask that all of you who are currently living in Oregon and have unaccredited degrees, please report to the local sheriff's office; you're under arrest. Oh, I don't care if all you've done is merely mentioned that you have an unaccredited degree. You are under arrest. Period.
Off with you now.

Now see, this is Oregonian mind-set (the southern half of the state, at least, in the old town of Klamath Falls). Bad enough we lost our timber business and Walmart, of all businesses, had to move in. And the rest of you (here on this site who live in Oregon) DARE to even mention the unaccredited . . . degree you have. You've either never known or have forgotten that the law is the law, and the local sheriff IS the law. Has the phrase "The Old West" lost its Custer intimidation already?

And to think I know live in Minnesota. Go figure!

Starkman