<p>I was on the Student Doctor Network forums, and there was a subheading that was talking about dual MD/PhD programs, calling them "Physician-Scientists". </p>
<p>Would you guys say that a scientist has a PhD in a science subject? Or is it anyone who does research? I know a lot of undergrad science majors that do research though, and I wouldn't call them scientists.</p>
<p>It depends. Like almost every profession there is a certain ammount of snobbery that because I endured 5-7 years and wrote a 500 page dissertation I should be called a scientsts and not anyone with a lower degree. The truth is I see an awful lot of PhD’s who are not worthy of the title and a ton of people with just BS’s doing superb science.</p>
<p>In fact, many areas of science are so specialized you can’t train for it in grad school. You have to really learn it yourself or on the job as an apprentice.</p>
<p>I’m in the sciences and I don’t think I’ve ever called anyone a scientist. Most people I’ve been around generally refer to someone by their degree or job title (in a lab, for instance, you might have undergrads, grad students, post docs, lab techs, PI). You might call someone with a PhD Dr. such and such, if you want to be proper. I don’t think the distinction is really relevant in the field, but I suppose I would consider a scientist as someone who does actual scientific work in a science field. Many will have a PhD but some could have masters degrees. I don’t know if I would necessarily consider a lab tech or someone similar as a “scientist.”</p>
<p>I’ve found that people rarely refer to themselves as a “scientist.” People usually refer to themselves as a “physicist,” “chemist,” etc. </p>
<p>Does a scientist need a PhD? Generally, I would say yes. There are certainly plenty of scientists that only have a masters, but that really depends on the field. Physics or chemistry, for example, basically require you to have a PhD to actually do any real research in your field.</p>
<p>Sheldon Cooper has a phD :D</p>
<p>For academic research that is true you need a Phd. In my industry very few Flavors Scientists or Food scientists have a PhD. Most of them learned via self study, apreticeships, and experience. A lot of analytical scientists don’t have the PhD. I have met many with MS’s and even just BS’s.</p>
<p>Sschoe2 is correct. In the working world, I have noticed the same thing. It all depends on the careers.</p>
<p>You can easily be a scientist with a BS, but often times you won’t be the one directing the research or be as responsible for interpreting the results. 90% of the work I do during research I do could be performed by a trained monkey, but it’s the other 10% where the extra education really comes in handy.</p>