Fallacy and For Motives
Medicine is a highly demanding field with not only so much seniority but also long study hours and heavy work load. It’s a highly competitive field, you’d understand that despite there being more than enough graduates each year, there is still an uneven spread. There is little job opportunity for general physicians, and overall life satisfaction is low. At least, so I was told. So then why still bother?
You’d hear a lot of reasons for it, like the prestige, the money, to continue or start some family tradition, or to help others, and so on. While all these reasons seem invalid, especially considering that the medical field is not for certain the most lucrative field, that prestige can be found elsewhere, and to merely continue some family tradition will not ensure one's happiness, to start a family tradition is only much too prideful and egocentric, and that there are other ways to help people, I do not deny that these are in a sense valid, but really some things should still be taken into consideration.
To become the first physician of the family, you gain the privilege and ability to treat your family, or become their health consultant, if ever they fall ill. You won’t be blindly led by health providers and consider other choices, as realistically, not all of them really will be in the best interest of your family or you. On the other hand, to continue a family tradition of becoming physicians, you don’t really have a choice in the first place to choose what you want to do. Not everyone who does gains happiness out of their decision, if they even had any in the first place. Maybe it feels good to be perceived as someone whom others can be proud of, but at what cost?
One can also not deny that compared to arts, science is more important in a sense it fulfils one’s primary needs – in this case, health – unlike arts, which only purpose is to satisfy one’s tertiary needs. Tertiary needs have barely any need for fulfilment if no primary needs are secured, thus making it more sensible to study medicine instead of arts, if one seriously considers ‘contributing to society’. It is undeniable that medicine can be capitalistic in a way it neglects the poor, or gives them a lower standard of care, making the tag 'a societal contribution' somewhat futile and meaningless.
Unfortunately for that, while I should be aware that some are sincere in their service and optimism towards the field, I am highly doubtful and cynical of any person who plainly claims so, as my thought behind their reason is that; if they so badly want to help, there are other ways about it. Why must prestige also be taken into consideration? What is wrong with becoming a trashman, or a janitor, or a nurse, or a priest, if you want to be of service so badly? All professions are just as proper as a physician. In fact, the profession of medicine might not all be even that proper or as noble and prestigious as you’d think it to be, as collusion, corruption, and nepotism are all still severely prominent. If you want to help people, but still take money and prestige into consideration, are you really willing to help at all?
More than a virtuous motive, I would better understand someone for their pursuit if it were due to their interest in the knowledge. People have each their own interests, each one free to pursue whatever they fancy, as to merely hide behind a virtuous motive is almost always insincere, and while I say all this, I myself ironically sympathize with all these ideas. Like others, I would like to live a life of service as I cannot stand the fact of merely existing and leeching off of others. I cannot deny that as much as its nobility is a tainted one, and that there are far better respectable professions to pursue, it is still highly viewed upon by the general population for its ‘strong work ethic’ and ‘required intelligence’, thus making that Aesculapian badge an advantage.
One less rational reason I have is that, I fear, nihilistically, as we are nearing the brink of collapse, maybe an apocalypse, I think that learning medicine would be of greater use. I don’t think I should elaborate on this or even justify this fear at all.
Regardless, everything that everyone has in mind and claims to be for others is ultimately for themselves. You cannot judge what comes from the heart as true or false, if it actually even sprung from within, but there’s really nothing wrong with being egocentric. It is the human drive to survive and you really have none of it in your right to change that in others, let alone yourself, and that’s okay.