Personality as 4-element outcome

personality as 4-element outcome 3

The human behaviour is the explicit translation of 4 interacting essential components: 1) the intellect (intelligence), 2) the spirit (soul, psyche), 3) the morals (moral values, faith), and 4) the sense (emotion, passion, compassion).

These components behave like individual constituents of a homogenous mix made of either 2 or more of them.

The beauty in this model is that the characters of the person can be viewed as intersection zones between 2 or more of these essential components of personality. This demonstration can effectively help define the meant component(s) by some personality strength/defect with possible plan suggestions for maintenance/change in that personality characteristic.
1- Forgiveness and amnesty are where “intellect” and “spirit” intersect.
2- Generosity and nobility are where “spirit” and “morals” intersect.
3- Modesty and sanctity are where “morals” and “sense” intersect.
4- Decentness and patience are where “sense” and “intellect” intersect.
5- Discipline and order are where “intellect”, “spirit” and “sense” intersect.
6- Self-confidence and charisma are where “intellect”, “spirit” and “morals” intersect.
7- Endeavour and accomplishment are where “spirit”, “morals” and “sense” intersect.
8- Precision and perfection are where “morals”, “sense” and “intellect” intersect.
9- Success is where all 4 components (intellect, spirit, morals and sense) intersect.

The treatment of any personality case is made possible by having a clear view about its origins and conditions. For example, in case of obsessive-compulsive disorder the meant component can be the sense (emotion and faithfulness). The counterbalance of these flooding emotions should be the intellect (reason); so, the treatment would be: 1) defining the emotions as the origin, and 2) defining the intellect as the counterbalance.

Persons with weak personality are of either weak intellect (or little experience) and cannot readily understand their environment, or very sensitive and emotional, while they do not make the best use of their intellect to properly invest their emotions.


The clinical medicine logic

The physician works in a large frame of 3 pillars: the preventive medicine, the diagnostic medicine and the curative medicine. From a broad practical view the physician’s job is mainly in the curative medicine pillar.

The clinical (curative) medicine logics may be thought of as:
1- Adjunctive medicine
– analgesic, sedative, anxiolytic
– Mood modifiers
– Psychoactive agents
2- Casual medicine
– surgery
– invasive diagnostic and therapeutic interventions
3- Regular medicine
– nutrition
– common nonspecific agents: laxative, purgative, emollient, carminative
– specific medical agents
– antibiotics and antimicrobials
– anticancer agents


Post view promotion: choose your favorite number and pick your jewelry right now from physician21!

P: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
H: 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Y: 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
S: 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
I: 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100
C: (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V)
I: (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V)
A: (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V)
N: (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V)
2: (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V)
1: (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V)

in-the-point (poems and essays)

Medical qualification consensus

I have been concerned for some time by the appropriate time lapse needed for the formation and qualification of physicians. It is always quite long but how long should it be? In parallel to this question another not less important view arises about a standard “medical qualification consensus”. The latter view proposes that there should not be a difference in the medical knowledge and training skills among all doctors. I remember the “difficult” time I had in my medical courses when there were a lot of things to understand, memorize, and interpret and to fear from.

I did not by that time know that there could be a problem in the learning process and what it could be except that I was always tired and life could just lose its delight; I am a future doctor! The door is thus open for each one, medical student, to build and adopt personal idea and trace an “emergency exit” for such apparent medical career crisis. Some sought a solution in simply memorize to preserve a respected position as a university staff member as best thing among all bad options. Some others diverted to international certificates for both recognition and enhancement. The third group made every possible effort to escape the GP label to a specialist or assistant specialist title. In many of those examples the solution was almost superficial and cosmetic. The outcomes of the medical service provided by many medical colleagues are, therefore, almost random and the learning curves are quite flat too. The typical query: doctors are guilty or victims?

The proposal for an efficient and working medical formation may find its success in a well designed medical qualification consensus. There could be no more need to read whole books or to sprain your mind to memorize “a line” within the covers of several hundred pages book just because it may come in a question. The consensus should be laid down and agreed upon by notable and experienced scholars and practicing physicians such that a whole subject, e.g. physiology, may not exceed 50 pages in its neatest and leanest form. A subject like anatomy, e.g., should not be such frustrating for a green student mind with all details in one menu, but rather served in pieces that are totally clinically and research-wise relevant. In this regards building models and simulations and encouraging learning maps and subjective imagination should be also very helpful.

basic medical sciences

Must know facts in medicine

Are there any facts in medicine? This question may come to medical students because of the many situations where a certain finding or outcome cannot be stated clearly or absolutely and not to forget the usual gap between academic study and the real daily practice. In this essay I would like to try to give a reasonable answer to this question if there could be any solid basis (evidence-based facts) for medical practice.
On one extreme of the scale, the human body should be regarded as a mere machine, a living machine, only in order to objectify and modularize the medical facts that we are looking for.
I. Generalities:
1- Doctor’s collegial conduct.
2- A well defined and openly made medical service fee (physician and other costs) is the only most effective statement to guarantee a responsible conduct of service giver and taker.
3- A substantial number of people’s morbidity or death is caused directly by medical staff dehiscence and faults.
4- Human body function and health is amenable to study and predict by mathematical methods such as probability estimation.
5- Patient’s misery for doctor but doctor’s ‘revelation’ for patient.
II. Functionalities:
1- Spatiotemporal connection.
2- No price for an absent goat. No single organ can replace or cover the absence of another organ.
3- Once born is done. The new born is completely made person that will change almost only in shape and size (genetic and social constitution).
4- Consolidation rule.
5- Life is neither gifted nor robbed.
III. System operation:
1- A human is an open system organo-heterotroph.
2- Self and nonself (immune system).
3- Flow and stagnation (in- and outflow).
4- True- and malposition (body positioning).
5- Juvenility and aging.
IV. Pathognomonic criteria:
1- Vital data (temperature, blood pressure, heart rate).
2- Inspection and light transmission.
3- Palpation, percussion and auscultation.
4- Reflex arches.
5- Biochemical and radiologic tests.
V. Remedies:
1- Social manipulation.
2- Life style.
3- Antibiotics.
4- Medical remedies.
5- Anesthesia and surgery.


Hippocrates of Cos


As it seems to be a pressing need by humans to credit somebody with the emergence of some discipline or art, we have got many fathers: Geber of chemistry, Socrates of philosophy, Lavoisier of modern chemistry, Mendel of genetics, Alhazen of optics, Einstein of modern physics, and so on.

For medical students and practitioners, Hippocrates deserves special interest, because he is credited with the founding of the western school of medicine. Very interesting is that the father of modern medicine lived in the fifth century before Christ (460- 370 BC). The medical genius was born in the Greek island of Cos. Though the well appreciated medical texts found by that time were not only those written by Hippocrates, the honor gave to Hippocrates was not almost certainly a matter of chance. Accordingly, there could be other important physicians that helped in the establishment of a fine medical intuition as can be shown by good observation and cause-effect rationale, among which Hippocrates should have been the most eminent.

Before we go on to the astonishments of Hippocrates as the credited father of medicine, I wish to throw some light on his name that should be an old Greek word. As the name means horse power; ιππος (hippos) “horse” and κρατος (kratos) “power”, this would present an interesting proof about how one could be blessed by the meaning of the name he/she bears.

Hippocratic face, clubbing of fingers and Hippocratic bench are a few of the impressing medical contributions that are attributed to Hippocrates. The amazement seen in Hippocratic medical genius originates in the school he followed that regarded disease as a mere bodily phenomenon that is totally amenable to observation, interpretation, forecasting and treatment apart from magic or spirits (superstition). Such a medical school may have been several centuries ahead of its time as that myth-imparted picture of disease was not almost completely debunked until the 19th century (the urea synthesis by Wӧhler, the vaccination by Jenner and the germ theory of disease by Koch) and the 20th century (the discovery of antibiotics by Fleming).

Hippocrates’ fine medical intuition caused him to largely dispense with “the specific diagnosis”, when basic medical knowledge and research tools were lacking in that time and to adopt gentle and general rules in the medical care (a prognosis-oriented generalized therapy relying on the healing power of nature – “vis medicatrix naturae” in Latin) that suit a generalized diagnosis. For example, he generally avoided using drugs and specialized treatment except in certain occasions and gave great attention to patients’ hygiene, nourishment, exercise, rest and positioning.

Francis Adams describes Hippocrates as “strictly the physician of experience and common sense.” While Fielding Garrison says “He is, above all, the exemplar of that flexible, critical, well-poised attitude of mind, ever on the lookout for sources of error, which is the very essence of the scientific spirit.”

* This essay was written based on internet searches.