Not showing proper deference to authority figures?

Post Reply New Topic

Does anyone sometimes provoke a shocked response when you don't show the expected level of deference to authority figures like doctors or other official "experts"? I have no problem disagreeing with people if I think they are wrong but certain people can react quite poorly to this and take it as a personal assault on their status. I think I make it worse when I try to justify my opinions with arguments or facts.

I suppose I could be more subtle but I find it quite liberating to freely express my opinion rather than keep quiet. Of course I'm often wrong and I appreciate when someone corrects an misapprehension of mine.

Yes.
I've always had problems with that.
I mean, I mostly comply with them, but they aren't special to me because of their social standing.

Yes, especially when talking to mental health professionals.

Yes, but my approach and attitude seem to be different from yours.

My style is to approach all people as social equals, meaning that any person I interact with, regardless of externally observable factors (age, social standing, hierarchical position, gender, credentials) gets essentially the same 'view' of me. This means that people who see themselves as "lower" in status will often like interacting with me, whereas people who see themselves as "higher" in status can sometimes become nonplussed, frustrated or irritated. Also, people *witnessing* my interactions with bosses, experts, and higher status persons have been known to have a "who do you think you are" reaction to share with me after the fact. I've also been advised quite frequently to shut up, keep quiet, talk less (even though most of the time I don't talk at all!).

In a recent, abortive attempt to get a qualified assessment, for example, I asked the psychologist if he had a system for receiving feedback as to the accuracy and reproducibility of his diagnoses. This was in response to his own opening question "do you have any questions for me before we get started". He appeared to be somewhat taken aback, and then fumbled for a bit before saying that someone working for the county had once made a point of calling him to tell him that the *format* and *completeness* of his reports were always acceptable. My failure to be suitably impressed must have shown, in spite of my best efforts to hide the disappointment and anxiety that resulted from this reply. I'd been hoping he'd have a track record, as do many other health care professionals such as surgeons, pediatricians and the like (especially if they are specialists) but apparently the only record that can exist is whether he dotted the i's and crossed the t's, so to speak.

Later in this marathon session, which ovveran by more than an hour over the appointed time due to the interview portion being longer than planned, he actually stopped me to say "I'm the therapist here" in an obvious bid to reassert authority. I felt immediate frustration, but not, ironically, with him. I felt frustrated with myself for 'doing it again' because whatever this mysterious 'it' is, it seems to really set off people in positions of real or self-identified authority. By contrast, my sister who was present and witnessed this event, said that he looked threatened and assumed that this meant he, and not I, had slipped.

There's a lifetime of this, and I could type a novel about it, but one thing I've never been able to do is cure myself of it. And I have tried, believe me. Something always slips, and often my first clue that it has will come to me via a third party. I rarely catch myself in the act.

^ Thanks for sharing. I can relate to that.

I think he was shocked that you even asked that question. "How dare you question the accuracy of my diagnoses"?


This is the kinda stuff that can tick me off real good.

It usually takes me a while to get beyond the 'confused, must analyse this' stage to get ticked off. Sometimes I don't make it to anger, but when I later describe the situation to a friend, they get mad or disparage the other party. Then I might stop and think about what has actually happened and why. There are times when I feel like a robot that keeps trying to reprogram itself to comply with Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, only to fail because each 'master' I meet has different demands and requirements that seem to change from one second to the next.

I don't care if they are the queen of England, I judge everyone by the same set of rules. I don't give them special status, or consideration or lower the bar just because they tell me they have a medical school degree.

I've never been able to recognize authority. It would be helpful if I could. At least I'd know what is expected of me. But I end up offending people without intending to. It's not that I think I should bow and scrape. It's that I want to control who I'm being nice to. The whole authority thing is invisible to me. I'd use it if I could see it. I have no objection to playing along with whatever role people think they have earned. I just can't figure it out.

As a Q in Star Trek fandom,
all I have to do is show up
and anyone with the rank of Captain or higher
reacts with immediate suspicion.
Lower ranking crew of a starship
tend to like me better.
And people who aren't Star Trek fans
really like me a lot.

Out of Star Trek costume,
I've had people tell me
I'm too intelligent.
Some have expressed
dislike or fear
because of that.

C'est la vie.

...

This is the same for me. I am respectful, period. It doesn't matter who you are. What I do not do is venerate, and this question of authority was mentioned by someone in response to my question about celebrities and hierarchy.
If someone is more knowledgeable than me in a particular area, then I may have marginally more trust in their opinion, but I would still require proof. This has been true of doctors throughout my illness - they were specialists, in one case associate professor of a state university medical school - and I was constantly misdiagnosed, to the point that I lost thousands of dollars in an operation which failed to find the cause and caused me years of chronic pain, and another misdiagnosis which left me with scars on my chest and back. The only reason I recovered was through my own research, and finding a surgeon who would agree to the surgery even though the professor had ruled it out. I fixed this problem, not the experts. The experience has made me even less likely to blindly believe anyone just because they are an "expert."
As to bosses and such - I can understand that they have a job to do sure, and their behaviour is likely intended to keep the business running, so if direction is reasonable I will comply. But I don't recognise any inherent status of that person being superior to me just because of the job they perform, and will not respond with deference toward them.

In my case, I would like to learn to wait, just a bit, before I come out with the truth as I know it. As a matter of fact, maybe that's my next life skill.

I have always been repelled by the idea of social hierarchy. People hold themselves in high regard because of material possessions, religious persuasion, life style choices, you name it. Their ways are the only correct ways, and anything outside of that should be shunned.

I don't mind showing respect to someone due to a position they've earned. That doesn't mean I'm going to fawn and not question.

Ah yes, Janeway and Picard were never big fans of Q It's ironic, because they like to command respect and show their authority, but they can't do it with Q, because he has more authority, being able to do whatever he wants in the universe with a snap of his fingers. He's not like an upstart young ensign trying to overstep his bounds with a higher authority figure, he IS the higher authority figure, and it drives the captains crazy!

Yes, being appropriately respectful to people of higher social standing has always been difficult for me. This has caused much trouble at work, with friends and family. I try to treat people the way I want to be treated. But, it just doesn't work that well when I bruise someone's ego.

Simply saying, "Yes, you are correct" and not my real opinion works wonders to avoid bruising egos.

I treat everyone the same, with respect unless they give me reason not- causing a problem at work at the moment as a young ambitious shiny rising star is demanding a level of deference he doesn't deserve as he expects more than anyone else. And quite frankly he is only interested in himself and doesn't react at all well to any challenges from anyone who dares to let it be known they don't think he is gods gift.

I struggle with being two faced and struggle to hide it if I don't like someone. I can however respect someone's opinion even if I don't like them if they have proved their competence in the subject they are addressing.

The problem has to do with the broad definition of respect. I have no issue in respecting genuine abilities, qualities, and deep domain knowledge, and I also respect that each individual may have a particular perspective different from mine, but I see the notion of deference to an authority figure as a very dangerous concept.

Power corrupts. The best definition of power that I've come across to date is: "power is the privilege of not having to learn".

This definition captures the essence of what is wrong with the broad definition of respect: the assumption that it is possible for some people to gain a position where learning becomes optional.

I treat everyone equal when it comes to expectations of honesty, readiness to learn, and readiness to admit mistakes. Some people perceive this as a lack of respect. That's fine. I don't have any ambitions to be liked by everyone.