Disciplined Minds: A Critical Look at Salaried Professionals and the Soul-battering System That Shapes Their Lives Paperback – December 4, 2001

And by "radicals" I mean those wild eyed crazies who believe in democracy and basic human rights! Probably the most eye-opening thing I've read in the past few years, which is saying a lot because I tend to read a lot of eye-opening stuff. This book meant so much to me that I want to give it the review it deserves, but unfortunately my time is limited.

This book helped me come to terms with my past negative feelings and behavior towards authority figures, problems I have to this day as I see most authority as artificial and harmful, particularly in fundamentally undemocratic settings such as school and the workplace where - surprise! - we we just happen to spend the majority of our waking hours. It helped me understand that my push-back to otherwise nice folks was instinctive, normal, and necessary for my own sense of worth. The parallels the author draws between POW survival tactics and work survival tactics are spot on. Those who rule us are quite organized, but frown on us organizing. As a former science professional myself, I found the arguments against elitism and professionalism as part of the problem quite exhilarating and freeing. And I've never seen such a succinct explanation of why the media is so conservative even though the majority of media professionals self-identify as liberal. Bravo Mr. Schmidt!

I could not put it down.

They way the book starts is gripping already. In it the author shows a considerable amount of statistics showing how unempathic and conservative professionals can be, in comparison to other strata of society.

The point the author makes about internships in Medicine is, in my opinion, key. Many, if not most, of the things interns do could be done by nurses; doctors sleep very little, eat poorly, and some resort to stimulants in order to survive the ordeal of sitting the feared exam. The stress, lack of sleep and of nutrients, leaves them in such a mental state that they can do little but memorise the stuff they are to study, if they wish to pass the exam.

It is clear, however, that this will not improve the quality of the doctors-to-be; their bedside manner won't improve, and they are not encouraged to devise new methods for restoring their patients' health but simply to memorise and study the solutions presented by big pharma without the faintest hint of critical sense.

The author lost his job at the Institute Of Physics since this book was published. I am a scientist by trade, and the book made me think quite a bit. Since I read it I recommend it and pass it on to colleagues and students alike.

I just finished Jeff Schmidt's book about salaried professionals. The central theme of his book is that all work is political. That is, whatever work the professional in America is doing, it's goals are to support the status quo. This includes all areas of work life. It is the same in the Defense industry as it is in the Medical industry.

Speaking of the medical industry, I imagine Patch Adams would be considered a radical professional in Jeff's estimation. He challenged the status quo in a way that changed lives.

The author traces the indoctrination process from undergraduate social background to graduate admission and through graduate school, deftly showing how each component is in place to select those with the best attitude. And of course that attitude is one of uncritical acceptance of the work assigned. There's never any thought of how your work is affecting society as a whole.

His strongest chapters in the book are The Division of Labor and the first chapter in Part 2, Opportunity. The book is worth getting if you only read these two chapters. It speaks to not only the technical divide, but also the social divide that has become more hidden these days. A person who has raised himself out of the working class to the professional class through the "meritocracy" has had a harder time of it. They've had to discard their working class beliefs in equality and freedom and subjugate them to those in charge now: the large corporations.

A few relevant quotes from the book that were most impacting to me:

"Widespread belief in individual opportunity protects the system from potentially devastating attack -- it protects a backward setup in which a minute number of people exercise control over the nation's huge amount of capital in industry, agriculture, and transportation, while vast numbers of people work that capital and get nothing more than monetary compensation for their time."
- page 101

"Thus, through the ideology of individual opportunity, the system can keep the majority of workers in stressful and alienating jobs, and even get some enthusiastic support, just by maintaining the opportunity for a few workers to escape their survival-oriented work lives."
- page 101

So, in a capitalist system, only those with real capital have any chance of competing. And how many times do we see the "under-capitalized" small business with a great idea get that idea stolen and then out-marketed by a large corporation who has money to throw into the venture. The company (C-level's and shareholders) get a bit bigger bonus while the small entrepreneur is decimated.

The other bombshell from this book comes from page 128:

"The academically average working-class student who gets no offer of employment, but who tries to attend graduate school anyway, is at a tremendous disadvantage with respect to a similar student from a middle-class family with financial resources. The extra burden of having to leave the department to earn money goes to the working-class student, helping to perpetuate that student's relatively low academic standing. This is an example of what the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu describes as the university's tendency to transmute social hierarchies into academic hierarchies -- to guide stedents to academic slots that correspond to the socioeconomic slots from which they come."

And I always thought it was that I wasn't smart enough to compete! If all of us got into Harvard and had our MBA living expenses paid by our family like Romney, I'll bet a good majority of us could complete the degree successfully as he did.

But that wouldn't be the whole story. Because you see, apparently the lower classes aren't as fit as the middle and upper classes to be professionals. As the author states (again on page 128):

"Middle-class students are simply easier than working-class students to train as professionals. They are not smarter; their attitudes and outlook simply need less adjustment to meet the system's demands."

Wow. Now for statements like this, the book is criticized as a Marxist rant. I'll admit the book is a bit of a rant, but it is not Marxist. I guess the anti-Marxists would prefer that people simply accept their station in life and learn to like it. Well, what's American about that? Sounds like a statement right out of 14th and 15th century Europe and the "divine right of kings."

There are some great chapters on how the actual admissions tests are more attitude selectors than aptitude selectors. Those insights opened my eyes and I'm sure they will for you too.

It's an admittedly hard read, but well worth your investment. It backs up with solid (not mere anecdotal) references to what you've always had a hunch about in the workplace.

The book ends with a bunch of suggestions on how to begin to transform the system from within. You won't agree with all of them, but this is a worthy addition to the legacy of previous writers (Noam Chomsky, Neil Postman, Aldous Huxley) warning us about the systems we are born into.

Other books tell you why and who, but if you want to know HOW "They" managed to perpetuate the status quo for all these years, this book gives an inside glimpse. As an independent professional myself, I now know why I was instinctively against staying a full time employee. This book just confirms I made the right decision.

I quit my science PhD after passing quals, so much of this book resonates deeply with me. One of his theses in the middle of the book is that those who quit graduate school do so to preserve their identity, interests, and values rather than conform to an alienating system that seeks to build professionals who will accept assigned ideologies and priorities uncritically. Without agreeing with every point, I can say that Schmidt's description of the true aims of professional qualifications and training were unusually frank and refreshing.

He starts to wander into shark-jumping territory towards the end, comparing professional training or employment to confinement in a prisoner of war camp. But there is still enough thought-provoking content here that I rate it 4 stars and would recommend the book to anyone who wants to hear a fresh perspective on the role of professionals in society.

In some ways this is a sad book. It outlines clearly how most academics are content to follow the political fashions of the day to survive. Of course at some level they know that they are not independent, but like anyone else they could care less. Myths about the Ivory Tower come tumbling down in this book.