On Doctor's Syndrome

When I was in medical school, decades ago, I recognized a syndrome I will call Doctor's syndrome. I call it that because I noticed it among MDs, but I have come to see over the course of my life that it is a more common syndrome associated with highly learned individuals, many who receive doctorate degrees of one sort of the other. And since there is a real hierarchy in the snobbery of individuals with doctorate degrees (as evidenced by one of my professor's who, upon learning I was attending medical school instead of graduate school in chemistry, remarked "Oh, so you want to be a real doctor, not just a PhD" in a not so kind voice), I continue to call it Doctor's syndrome, although a lot of economists seem to be afflicted. Doctor's syndrome works like this. An individual goes through a long, difficult period of training in one particular field. It is associated with a deal of hazing, put-downs, trials and tribulations, in short, an initiation. Eventually, mastery of some portion of the field is noted and acknowledged, and the individual practices according to the master of that sub-portion of that field. Somewhere, there comes the delusion that, because the individual is at the top of their game in their area, they are now capable of solving the problems of every field. Because a guy (and they always were men) could take out an inflamed appendix or solve a case of gonorrhea, they must be capable of running a business. Or solve political problems. But it really seems to reach its ultimate in the real of economists. I pick on economists because they have always seem to equate their mastery of a soft, observational-based area of study with that of the physical sciences, with the attendant rush to use mathematics to "prove" their theories. Anyway, individuals with learning, and mastery, of the field of economic behavior, are allowed to comment and set policy on areas, such as energy policy, that they really have no business being involved with. Imagine calling your MD to get advice on buying an electric car versus sticking with a plain old gas vehicle. Or calling your power plant operator to get advice on treatment for your lymphoma. Or calling an economist to help you with (or, I should say, when) we might run out of cheap oil. My point is this: now that I am out of the medical profession, and instead practice on computer systems, I have an obligation to tell you I can't take out your appendix. As a CISSP (Certified Information System Security Professional), I practice under a code of ethics that says that, that I will only do work that I have knowledge and training and expertise, and will tell my clients when they should seek expert opinion on any other area of mastery. Don't any of these other guys operate under a code of ethics?