Is Dr Phil arrogant?
By delenep
@delenep (212)
United States
May 2, 2007 11:11am CST
I watched Dr Phil's man camp recently and was horrified at the behaviour of Scott. More surprising to me tho was my perception of Dr Phil. Usually I find him to be very understanding, but this time I felt he came off as arrogant and condescending. While I don't condone Scott's behaviour, I felt that Dr Phil was only interested in his own view and what he had to say, not with how scott felt or what he had to say. Scott should have participated and cleaned up, but calling him a child? I felt that Dr Phil wanted him to leave if he wouldn't do things his way in his time. Scott may have wanted his way, but so did dr phil. Dr Phil was not very empathetic towards scott and I've noticed on his other shows that he gets to viewing things a certain way and that's it. You believe what he thinks and get help so u can be what he wants u to be, or g'bye. Wonder if he was like this b4 he became famous?
1 response
@Aswan1980 (19)
• Netherlands
2 May 07
The first question that arises in my mind is, 'why do people go on air with their problems'? I find it disturbing that people today as opposed to people some fifty to hundred years ago do not see any problem with or have no objection to revealing the most private detaills of their lives and that of their loved ones.
Why is it that people will not try to resolve their problems privately or with the help and support of family, friends even a psychologist if needed? What is your selfworth and how do you value your loved ones if you drag them on to a television show and discuss intimate situations for the entire world to see?
Dr. Phill is no better than any other qualified doctor in his field. Being on television however creates some problems, because now if you're wrong about something it may or may not effect the ratings. I can't say that it is a dominant factor on his show, however it is apparent that as a doctor he doesn't wanna lose any credibility. This is evident from the few shows he did as a mild rebuttal to the overwhelming critisism that he had been receiving through letters and email. He invited some people who critisised him on some issues with regards to specific shows he had done and he set out to address the issues raised by them. Depending on how much slack you wanna cut dr. Phill, he was trying to rebuttal even if it was in the most friendly way.
Dr. Phill has opinions and draws conclusions which I don't always agree with, and there are some other things which I might agree with only because they are common sense. I have never felt enlightend by watching dr. phill, and eventhough he tries his best to provide indisputable advise I have seen his weak moments and he is more comfortable speaking then carrying on a discussion.
I understand that people come there for help, and that they should listen to the one known as the allround expert but the fact is that the only way to solve a problem is to acknowlegde it exists and have the courage to face it. Arrogance will not benefit you if you're looking for solutions. People often think the solution is having the other person see how wrong they are consequently how perfect you are. Which even if one doesn't intend it that way, is the way it comes across.
Having said all that, occasionally dr. Phill has guests on his show which I find abnoxious, arrogant, stupid and hypocritically naïve (which just means not naïve at all but trying to come off as being naïve). I don't mind them getting a verbal beating at all. In the end it is show business, and it has to generate piles of money just as everything else in the entertainment branche.
