Are doctors men of science

• The essay compels s to think in a new way about doctors. Common

man is generally non critical and accepts doctors as men of science.
• People never try to think carefully and deeply to find truths. That’s
why common people hold many ridiculous beliefs. For instance a
common man usually thinks that every scientist and captain of any
trading ship is as great man as Galileo. A common street singer is
considered to be as expert as Helmoltz. A petty roadside pigeon
dealer is considered as Darwin. All these examples show a common
illusion. People commonly think that doctors are great men of
science.
• G.B. Shaw discusses that relation of doctors and science. He thinks
that doctors are not actually men of science. Science is a complete
thinking process that holds different technical steps. The scientific
method is strictly a logical process with nothing superficial or
superfluous. Everything needs evidence. Things are tested again and
again. People busy in medical researches have reduced human
miseries to its lowest level but are doctors doing this?.
• In this regard doctors are not men of science. They cure people that’s
true but a common practicing doctor has never added anything to
the existing knowledge. They simply cram the names of some
medicines and diseases a doctor can do nothing to keep man away
from diseases.
• The writer narrated the case of his own relative she was treated in an
ignorant way. She was suffering from some ordinary symptoms which
indicated the need for a holiday and a change. The doctor satisfied
her by giving her a stiff dose of heart trouble fortunately the old lady
survived and didn’t die. So the spirit of research and inquiry is totally
absent in doctors.
• In this regard there is no difference between a quack and qualified
doctor. A doctor is a qualified and registered practitioner. He
possesses adequate knowledge of science and human body. They
charge very high. They rob people and don’t treat them properly.
• Quacks on the other hand are unregistered and unqualified
practitioners. They don’t have enough knowledge of science.
Uneducated and ignorant people populate their clinics. They too
charge too high and earn a lot of money. The bone setters, the
herbalists and spiritual healers are are all included in the list of
Quacks.
• According to Shaw the only difference between a doctor and a quack
is that a qualified practitioner is authorized to sign the death
certificate officially. While the quack signs death certificate
unofficially. The business of both kills people.
• Shaw points out that the quack too have thriving practices . Both
don’t have a scientific approach in the treatment of patients. He
gives us the example of bone setters. There are bone setters who
earn more than the qualified surgeons. They make money under the
very nose of great surgeons. In villages there are witch doctors who
sell charms. Then there are herbalists who collect herbs through
village fields. They boast of the magical charms of herbs. So there is
no difference between a qualified doctor and a quack.
 The Bachelor’s dilemma
• A bachelor is the one who does not take a decision in his life and sticks to
the condition of being unmarried. The bachelor is not a common man
rather he goes against the traditions and set ways of life in a society. He
avoids the trap of responsibilities.
• Every person idealizes and takes him in different way. The wife idealizes
him as a challenge. She thinks that he is romantic charming and a
dreamlike man. She considers him far better than her snoring husband.
Sometimes she has sympathy with him and thinks of getting a girl for him.
• A husband sometimes glances at him with envy because he is a free man
who has not been trapped in the net of promises and desires of a family
• Sometimes he pities him as he is deprived of the conjugal bliss joy of
children and the homely pleasures of hearth.
• A girl has mixed feeling about him. Sometimes she is apprehensive
and thinks about diseases and disabilities mentioned in the Sunday
supplements and magazines. But mostly she tries to trap him she
knits a snare to trap him. And promises of home cooking.
• Another bachelor takes him as a friend who has an incomplete life
with one button missing from his shirt.
• For hostess he is an extra man or a partner to dance. The dinner
table takes him to be a gobbling mouth and psychiatrist takes him as
a patient.
• The writer describes two types of bachelors. One is a very clever boy
Don juan. He has plenty of time, initiative and a will for adventure.
He can do whatever he likes. He can pick the girl of his own choice
and have fun. He can experience all kind of joys. He flies high and is
envied by all.
• Then there is Don Mitty type. He suffers from lack of resources. He
does not have chance to pick the girl of his choice. But his dreamland
is full of such girls who always throng around him to please him and
to get his favours.
• A Bachelor faces many problems. The basic problem is his loneliness.
He has to spend all his life alone. He is alone in his joys, progress,
sorrows and illness. People try to use him in their own favours. Then
there are diseases that become his chronic partner. Almost every
bachelor suffers from maladies. Some of them are psychological,
related to anxiety and frustration And some are physical but most of
them are related to stomach diseases like ulcers. It is because he has
to eat in a disorganized way.
• The boredom always surrounds him . Nothing gives him true
happiness similarly he is deprived of conjugal happiness.
 Hosts and guests
• Hospitality is an old tradition of man . He acts as host or guest. This is
an outward action but the base of this act depends mainly on the
nature of man. Some people are host by nature and some are guests.
The writer discusses the psychological feature of mankind in a clear
manner. He categorizes man in two types. Members of one end
always remain at giving end and are called hosts. Members of second
class are always at receiving end and are called guests.
• Hospitality is an old tradition and there are many instances that
confirm this tradition.
• The ability of being a guest or host is reserved only to mankind.
Animals don’t exhibit this tendency. Even man has acquired it many
centuries . The early people like cavemen would never have been in
habit of giving and receiving hospitality. Human civilization has
brought this trend.
• Max Beerbohm has given many references to prove his point that
host ship though looks very selfless and bold kind of an act yet it is
never without motives. Its never selfless and innocent.
• Beerbohm gives many instances from various stories and gives many
historical allusions. His first reference is based on imagination. He
thinks the way in which first man may have acted as a host and
invited someone to dinner. The caveman and his wife may have
invited a red haired man to dinner who may have declined due to
suspicion and distrust. It shows that the instinct of host ship existed
even before guest ship.
• The first historical reference is about an Israelite called jael. She was
the wife of Heber, the king of Kenite. She cold bloodedly killed her
guest. Then the writer turns to Greece where Odysseues killed all his
enemies when they were under his roof as guests
• Then Circe a goddess has been mentioned as an example of bad host.
• Rome has been considered the most civilized region in the world. The
famous Borgia family of Rome used a mild poison in their drinks and
meals and everyone who dined with them were killed.
• Then the writer turns to Scotland Shakespeare has portrayed the
character of Macbeth and lady Macbeth who killed the King Dunkan
by mixing poison in his food. Host ship therefore can have evil and
malicious intentions. Charles Dickens in in his novel Pickwick papers
portrays Old Wardle who was a superb host. He invited Dingley Dell
 hosts and guests cont
• Our deepest instincts are those we share with rest of the animals
says Beerbohm. He states the true picture of human nature. In the
essay he shows that man and animals have much in common. most
of the people don’t like to share their belongings with others. If we
probe into human history we wil come to know that through history
man has not been able to share his belongings with other humans.
Similarly many animals like ancient men don’t like to share their
belongings. But nowadays due to various factors man has started
sharing his things for some material benefits. So these ancient
instincts have lost their meaning and significance.
• The essay gives us a moral lesson that we should always try to keep a
balance between both the roles of hosts and guests. Instead of
assuming one role he should always swing between both of them. If
host ship will be continued for a long time even it will loose its
significance.
 Tolerance
• Tolerance is the best essay written on such a subject. The writer says
at the beginning of the essay that people often talk about
reconstruction of the world. But this is quite pitiable that no one
actually makes a real effort to do it. The writer says that the only way
to make this world beautiful and worth living is to create an instinct
of beauty in one self. Furthermore people always preach love and
think that love is the only remedy to eradicate the negative instincts
of aggression, tyranny, and prejudice from the world
• Love is a great force but only in private life in public life tolerance is
the only solution as tolerance means to bear up with people despite
hatred and differences. So tolerance is the only key to make this
world peaceful.
• Forster’s famous words “it is easy to see fanaticism in others but
difficult to spot it in oneself” have been the subject of discussion by
the critics. The word fanaticism means to have abnormal enthusiasm
in one’s views especially concerned with religion and political matters.
It is an evil instinct that gives birth to racism, hatred and prejudice.
However it is very ironic that people find fanaticism in others but
seldom try to observe it in themselves. Different religious, social and
political groups preach generosity but contrary to it practice
fanaticism. They are crushing others for their own material obsession.
It is a negative tendency leading people towards bloodshed, wastage
of time and money.
• Fanaticism is opposite to tolerance which is foundation of a peaceful
society. Inshort everyone is claiming to be a tolerant and peaceful
human but nobody is ready to accept fanaticism in himself. Rather
people always condemn others to be fanatic.
• It is very difficult for a white man to love a black man. Most of the
people don’t like one another, the shapes of their noses, the colour
of their skin and the way they talk and smell. There are two solutions
to it one is the Nazis solution and other is tolerance. So its practically
not possible that people should love one another so tolerance is the
only solution.