Is 'resurrecting' Jesus & Mohammed offensive?

[ofthesun]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Leafing through the interview feedbacks, I notice the school I am interviewing at tomorrow (my last school and #2 choice) has a recurring tendency to ask the traditional, “If you could bring back from the dead any three individuals from history for dinner, who would it be?”

To answer, the only person close to me that has ever died is my grandfather. Having another dinner with him would be nice, so he would be first choice.

After that, without a doubt the other two I would pick would be:

#1) Jesus Christ
#2) The Prophet Mohammed

As foundations for two of the biggest religious movements in the past millennia, I can’t think of any people that would be more interesting to chat with about the direction the world has taken and their influence in retrospect etc.

I mean it in the most respectful way to other religions or faiths. However, I wonder if my talking about them in this way would be blasphemous and might be offensive to my interviewers, thus hindering my chances.

How might an admissions committee (prof, student, community) take an answer like this?

If these two are off limits, who might you go with instead?

 

[tifa]

careful now...

 

[Risa]

I think if done right, it needn't be blasphemous.

My biggest reservation would actually be that it's likely pretty overdone... I think a LOT of people would choose those guys, and you might want to consider whether you're really choosing the people who will best provoke conversation by which your interviewer can learn more about you. If Jesus and Mohammed will do it best, then go for it.

 

[BaylorGuy]

I think if done right, it needn't be blasphemous.

My biggest reservation would actually be that it's likely pretty overdone... I think a LOT of people would choose those guys, and you might want to consider whether you're really choosing the people who will best provoke conversation by which your interviewer can learn more about you. If Jesus and Mohammed will do it best, then go for it.

I'm gonna agree here as well...its easy to pick jesus and mohammed and some other really famous people. I think the grandfather is a good choice because you can definitely tell a story about that and so forth...think about your other choices though. I'm assuming you've got some time to decide, which is good. Look at influential books you've read, courses you've taken, research perhaps, etc.

 

[willow18]

I'd just play it safe and go with God.

 

[LabMonster]

By asking such a potentially loaded question, the interviewers have agreed to give the answers certain latitude. By this I mean you could choose Adolf Hitler, but you better have a good reason for choosing a sociopathic, genocidal megalomaniac.


I think the reasons for your choices are more important than the choices themselves in such instances (provided the choices themselves aren't outwardly stupid or intentionally offensive.)

 

[ofthesun]

Ya ok. I'm leaning towards a change.

One I will probably pick over the religious guys to show 'character' (despite the fact that i'd prefer jesus and mohammed anytime) will be Dr. Albert Shweitzer, because as a musician-(wannabe)doctor, I can bring up things I'd be interested to know about his diverse life and where he felt he had the greatest influence in his practice, family, etc. all told.

Past that, I'm still looking for my third. I might go with Kurt Cobain because I was big fan, but I'd be worried about 2/3 of my people being musicians (even if one was also an awesome physician) .... I AM there for medicine 🙂

Other than that I'm with a generic Gandhi or maybe Van Gogh or more thinking to do.

Crazy ad coms. 🙄

 

[Hari Kari]

Ideas:

Charles Shultz- you miss Snoopy
Dr. Seuss- widespread appeal
Christopher Columbus- adventurous endeavors
Madame Curie- woman in "man's world"
John Wilkes Booth- why???
Henry the Eighth- huh???
Walt Disney

Go nuts.

 

[CatsandCradles]

I'd just play it safe and go with God.

It was atheist philosopher, Frederich Nietzsche who said "God is dead" right?


I like to turn that around and say, Nietzche died - but God has raised him up and glorified him too.

(Sorry, I'm one of those nerds who think God will redeem everyone 🙂 )


Nevertheless that would be interesting take on a medical school paper. You'd certaintly have the adcom reading it and talking about it. You can put down Karl Marx and Paul Sarte to.

 

[CatsandCradles]

After that, without a doubt the other two I would pick would be:

#1) Jesus Christ
#2) The Prophet Mohammed

But becareful if you put down Christ.

Because the adcom might say, "So you don't beleive in the Ressurection, that Christ died on the cross and on the third day, God raised him up?"



I am a Christian and at first when I saw this medical school question, I immediately picked Jesus - but then the adcom would probably slam me by pointing out that in Christianity, Christ rose from the dead. Basically this is a very tricky tricky question the medical school is asking. They know most people are going to say "Christ" and this will tell the adcom that the medical school canidate is going by his or her emotions and not thinking carefully before answering.



Now you could argue this from the atheist point of view as well and say, "No I am an atheist - and religion is the opium of the people." Willo18's response might sound like a joke, but it has enourmous potential to start a good conversation if you are an atheist. But be ready for a debate.

You should probably stick with your Grandfather, and stay clear of any religious figures. This is one heck of a tricky question. This is another example of a very tricky question*

It sort of like the old window trick. The interviewer says, "Can you open the window please? It's very hot in here."

And the canidate walks to the window. If he or she is sharp and paying attnetion, they'll notice the window was nailed down and say that it is.

If he's a dim wit, he'll keep trying to open the window but without any luck and this will reveal to the interviewers that the canidate doesn't pay attention to details.



*(Note: I was interviewed at West Virgina Osteopathic and they played a similar trick like this on me during the interview)

 

[CatsandCradles]

May I ask what school this is? Is it Loma Linda?

 

[Idiopathic]

Talk about a powderkeg, one from which there is little hope for escape. Your goals during interviews should be centered around playing to the middle. You never know who your interviewers will be, and this is why you should refrain from bringing up politics or religion. If questioned directly, then answer truthfully, no harm there...you will not be penalized for having an opinion. But by initiating such discussion, and then going down that road, you gain nothing, and potentially adversely affect your interview (even if only subconsciously). By choosing a completely non-controversial person for this question (i.e. relatives, Einstein, Mother Teresa) you avoid the pitfalls. This is certainly not a suggestion to renounce your faith or hide it, but oftentimes, these interview situations should be massaged carefully, and toes should be avoided when stepping...you will find that they are plentiful.

edit: and be prepared for the "how do you know they weren't the same person" question.

 

[CatsandCradles]

Talk about a powderkeg, one from which there is little hope for escape. Your goals during interviews should be centered around playing to the middle. You never know who your interviewers will be, and this is why you should refrain from bringing up politics or religion. If questioned directly, then answer truthfully, no harm there...you will not be penalized for having an opinion. But by initiating such discussion, and then going down that road, you gain nothing, and potentially adversely affect your interview (even if only subconsciously). By choosing a completely non-controversial person for this question (i.e. relatives, Einstein, Mother Teresa) you avoid the pitfalls. This is certainly not a suggestion to renounce your faith or hide it, but oftentimes, these interview situations should be massaged carefully, and toes should be avoided when stepping...you will find that they are plentiful.

edit: and be prepared for the "how do you know they weren't the same person" question.

I second that. Try stay away from religious and political figures if you are unsure of what might happen.

 

[jebus]

Seriously, you should just say your old man neighbor from when you were a kid because he had a beautiful flower garden and he used to sneak you lemonade when your mom wasn't looking. Who cares if it isn't true.
That or Bruce Lee. Bruce Lee>>>Chuck Norris (this was documented on film).

 

[CatsandCradles]

Seriously, you should just say your old man neighbor from when you were a kid because he had a beautiful flower garden and he used to sneak you lemonade when your mom wasn't looking. Who cares if it isn't true.
That or Bruce Lee. Bruce Lee>>>Chuck Norris (this was documented on film).

We went from Jesus to Chuck Norris Ok I admit it, I keep seeing these Norris post on SDN, but I don't know how it got started. Can someone fill me in?

 

[LabMonster]

Talk about a powderkeg, one from which there is little hope for escape. Your goals during interviews should be centered around playing to the middle.

Sorry, anyone asking loaded questions may get loaded answers. Changing your responses based on a game theory analysis of what an interviewer will think defeats an interview's purpose. Not only are you being interviewed, you are interviewing them, and I have no need for any school who passes judgement on my beliefs and not my abilities.

 

[crazy_cavalier]

Ah yes premeditis rears its ugly head.

You shouldn't be paranoid or think that your response would be offensive. Your interviewers are educated people, give them a little credit. I'm sure they won't misinterpret or misconstrue.

As a side note, I think the three I would pick would be:

1.) Aristotle
2.) Adolf Hitler
and
3.) Nikola Tesla

Three undeniably remarkable minds...

 

[crazy_cavalier]

By this I mean you could choose Adolf Hitler, but you better have a good reason for choosing a sociopathic, genocidal megalomaniac.

Hehe well I suppose I ought to supply MY reason for choosing him. He's actually quite a fascinating historical figure, if you think about it. Moreover, it's a testament to some part of humanity that the crimes committed under his regime were perpetrated by rational beings. I think it's important to analyze and understand how it is that Hitler assumed power, and it would be interesting to see the rationale that goes behind human acts of atrocity.

 

[LabMonster]

Hehe well I suppose I ought to supply MY reason for choosing him. He's actually quite a fascinating historical figure, if you think about it. Moreover, it's a testament to some part of humanity that the crimes committed under his regime were perpetrated by rational beings. I think it's important to analyze and understand how it is that Hitler assumed power, and it would be interesting to see the rationale that goes behind human acts of atrocity.

Which would be my reasons for choosing him, although I think he would be too mentally ill to get any new information.

That and I couldn't even eat my soup in his presence. yuck

 

[8744]

Leafing through the interview feedbacks, I notice the school I am interviewing at tomorrow (my last school and #2 choice) has a recurring tendency to ask the traditional, “If you could bring back from the dead any three individuals from history for dinner, who would it be?”

To answer, the only person close to me that has ever died is my grandfather. Having another dinner with him would be nice, so he would be first choice.

After that, without a doubt the other two I would pick would be:

#1) Jesus Christ
#2) The Prophet Mohammed

As foundations for two of the biggest religious movements in the past millennia, I can’t think of any people that would be more interesting to chat with about the direction the world has taken and their influence in retrospect etc.

I mean it in the most respectful way to other religions or faiths. However, I wonder if my talking about them in this way would be blasphemous and might be offensive to my interviewers, thus hindering my chances.

How might an admissions committee (prof, student, community) take an answer like this?

If these two are off limits, who might you go with instead?

Good Lord. This is as stupid a question as "If you could be a tree, what kind would you be."

I feel sorry for all of you about to embark on the whole crazy process. If I had been asked a stupid question like that on a normal job interview I'd probably get up, shake the guys hand, and decline to continue the interview. Unfortunately, except for the small percentage of you who will get accepted to every medical school to which you apply, they have you by the short hairs.

I look foward to the day when I can go on a job interview again where I am on an equal footing with my potential employer. Maybe have them kiss my ass for a change.

Besides, Jesus would kick Mohammed's ass.

 

[8744]

And they only ask stupid questions like that because they are geeks who have no real idea how to interview applicants and have to stoop to this sort of thing almost out of desperation.

Your choce of historical figures has absolutely noting to do with your fitness for anything and reveals nothing about your personality especially as most pre-meds neglect their historical education in preference to their medical studies.

I got asked that question in a group interview many, many moons ago. Some of the gag-inducing answers were the Buddha, Ghandi, and of course Martin Luther King. When it got to me I said I'd bring back my poor Black Lab Ajax (who meant a lot more to me than friggin' Ghandi).

Sorry. Stupid interview questions are one of my pet peeves. As if you need to give pre-meds another reason to be pretentious.

 

[8744]

..Three undeniably remarkable minds...

So what. I bet they'd bore the crap out of you. You'd start wishing you had ressurected somebody fun.

 

[lilmissangel]

Besides, Jesus would kick Mohammed's ass.

Somebody has issues!! Way to be stupid and insensitive.

 

[Law2Doc]

Leafing through the interview feedbacks, I notice the school I am interviewing at tomorrow (my last school and #2 choice) has a recurring tendency to ask the traditional, “If you could bring back from the dead any three individuals from history for dinner, who would it be?”

To answer, the only person close to me that has ever died is my grandfather. Having another dinner with him would be nice, so he would be first choice.

After that, without a doubt the other two I would pick would be:

#1) Jesus Christ
#2) The Prophet Mohammed

As foundations for two of the biggest religious movements in the past millennia, I can’t think of any people that would be more interesting to chat with about the direction the world has taken and their influence in retrospect etc.

I mean it in the most respectful way to other religions or faiths. However, I wonder if my talking about them in this way would be blasphemous and might be offensive to my interviewers, thus hindering my chances.

How might an admissions committee (prof, student, community) take an answer like this?

If these two are off limits, who might you go with instead?

If you want to get into med school, stay far away from religious or racially sensitive issues. No gods, prophets, hitlers. While these things can talk volumes about you, how they are received will more likely be dependant on the interviewer than how you intended it.
Albert Schwietzer is a good one. Mother Theresa is a good one, Watson- Crick- Franklin -- the discoverers of DNA are good ones. William Osler is a good one. Sinclair Lewis (author of Arrowsmith, a premed staple) is a good one. You get the point. Keep it interesting, medically related and inpirational, and be sure to know a bit about these folks and their works before you mention them.

 

[8744]

Somebody has issues!! Way to be stupid and insensitive.

Come on now. Just because your guy would get his ass kicked doesn't mean I have issues.

 

[cfdavid]

I think if done right, it needn't be blasphemous.

My biggest reservation would actually be that it's likely pretty overdone... I think a LOT of people would choose those guys, and you might want to consider whether you're really choosing the people who will best provoke conversation by which your interviewer can learn more about you. If Jesus and Mohammed will do it best, then go for it.

I disagree. I think it would be a very unique answer, frankly. I could see many pre-meds choosing guys like albert einstein or louis pasteur etc. (not that they wouldn't be great choices either).

 

[RayhanS1282]

My picks:

1) Franklin Roosevelt - just to show all the politicians on Capital Hill what a great president looks like.

2) George Orwell - just to know if the current state of government is what he feared.


3) Hitler - just to kill him again.

 

[CatsandCradles]

My picks:

3) Hitler - just to kill him again.

 

[C.P. Jones]

I disagree. I think it would be a very unique answer, frankly. I could see many pre-meds choosing guys like albert einstein or louis pasteur etc. (not that they wouldn't be great choices either).

I think that many people would want to choose someone like Jesus, but then everyone will also think that everyone else will have the same person, so they switch, and then no one does it!.....I think either one of those would be excellent, especially if you have a very convincing reason why

 

[8744]

My picks:



2) George Orwell - just to know if the current state of government is what he feared.

Confess. You've never read 1984, Homage to Catalonia, or any other of George Orwell's writings.

 

[Centinel]

Hehe well I suppose I ought to supply MY reason for choosing him. He's actually quite a fascinating historical figure, if you think about it. Moreover, it's a testament to some part of humanity that the crimes committed under his regime were perpetrated by rational beings. I think it's important to analyze and understand how it is that Hitler assumed power, and it would be interesting to see the rationale that goes behind human acts of atrocity.

This has been done. See Stanley Milgram's experiments at Yale in the 1960s.

 

[RayhanS1282]

Confess. You've never read 1984, Homage to Catalonia, or any other of George Orwell's writings.

Only read 1984 and Animal Farm.

 

[Law2Doc]

I think that many people would want to choose someone like Jesus, but then everyone will also think that everyone else will have the same person, so they switch, and then no one does it!.....I think either one of those would be excellent, especially if you have a very convincing reason why

To be unique, just pick someone famous who is still alive. Then when you are corrected, just look at the interviewer in disbelief and say "you're kidding. Are you sure? I think you are wrong." I guarantee you will be remembered for this.

 

[willow18]

My picks:

1) Franklin Roosevelt - just to show all the politicians on Capital Hill what a great president looks like.

Roosevelt had his share of skeletons in the closet. From Pearl Harbor to a Clintonian-like mistress.

 

[tifa]

Somebody has issues!! Way to be stupid and insensitive.

And don't forget incredibly offensive!!!

 

[mostwanted]

Jesus would kick Mohammed's ass.

i also think this was very inappropriate. 👎

 

[jebus]

I think panda bear said it because jesus could walk on water on stuff; not as a commentary on religion.
This reminds me of when, during biology lab in college, we were looking at frog legs & nerves and I said to someone at my table, "We should throw these at other people and tell them it's a plague." (I thought that was comedy gold.) Well, nobody at the table got it (I guess it wasn't as funny as I thought) so I had to explain it. Then like 10 minutes after that she was all, "That was offensive."
Anyway, so my story had nothing to do with this thread.... I like stories.

 

[NonTradMed]

I think it's always wise to stay away from religion and politics during an interview. You never know how the interviewer may react. With admissions sometimes a crapshot, best to put your best foot out and not 'rock the boat'. That's my advice at least. I never had to explain anything controversial except for an ethical question they put forth. Interviews are not time to talk about your religious/political beliefs, it's a way to smooze the adcoms and convince them you'd love to come to their school! 😀

I got asked that question in a group interview many, many moons ago. Some of the gag-inducing answers were the Buddha, Ghandi, and of course Martin Luther King. When it got to me I said I'd bring back my poor Black Lab Ajax (who meant a lot more to me than friggin' Ghandi).

Your dog is more interesting than Ghandi? Ha! I would love to sit and eat with Ghandi, if only to dissect his brain on the current state of religious strife in India and around the world. Besides, dogs are slobbery and smelly and drink from toilet bowls. 😀

 

[LO281OK]

I have always thought Theodore Roosevelt would be an interesting man to talk to and it would be easy to look quickly at his accomplishments/personality for support reasons.

 

[crazy_cavalier]

So what. I bet they'd bore the crap out of you. You'd start wishing you had ressurected somebody fun.

I bet you don't know the slightest thing about me. I actually enjoy ancient greek philosophy, and if you think Tesla was a boring person you are living in a different world than me.

The only one that might be boring is Hitler, but hearing him bark German like a hoarse dog is amusing in itself. It astounds me that he's regarded as some sort of eloquent speaker... he butchered the language!

Anyway, it's just a question, and you know what? Screw you if you don't like it. Believe it or not your response does say something about your character. Wanting to bring back your dog and spend a little time with him reveals you have a soft side, despite the **ckhead posts you made above. BTW I take offense to your side comment about Jesus and Mohammed. And walking out of an interview is immature.

 

[drmota]

Confess. You've never read 1984, Homage to Catalonia, or any other of George Orwell's writings.

you need a psych consult.
-mota

 

[drmota]

id say Freud, so i wouldn't have to pay for the drugs.
-mota

 

[8744]

I bet you don't know the slightest thing about me. I actually enjoy ancient greek philosophy, and if you think Tesla was a boring person you are living in a different world than me.

The only one that might be boring is Hitler, but hearing him bark German like a hoarse dog is amusing in itself. It astounds me that he's regarded as some sort of eloquent speaker... he butchered the language!

Anyway, it's just a question, and you know what? Screw you if you don't like it. Believe it or not your response does say something about your character. Wanting to bring back your dog and spend a little time with him reveals you have a soft side, despite the **ckhead posts you made above. BTW I take offense to your side comment about Jesus and Mohammed. And walking out of an interview is immature.

Har har. Dude. Nobody enjoys ancient Greek philosophy. People enjoy the idea of Ancient Greek philosophy. As in, "Hey, look at me! I'm studying Anixmander!" It gives you the imprimateur of being an intellectual.

Man. That Xenophanes is a real page-turner.

The point is that one day you are goig to look back and wince in shame that you were ever so pretentious. Your AMCAS essay, in particular, will make you cringe if you read it after you graduate medical school. Don't believe me? Save your essay and read it four years from now.

My other point is that the unless the point of asking you what historical figure you'd want to spend the day with is to identify and select against the most pompous ass in the room, questions like that are pointless and are typical of the kind of psycho-babble that has permeated the medical profession.

It is just a question. And this is just an internet forum. I'm not planning on invading your town and putting it to the sword so relax. Obviously I have struck a nerve.

 

[8744]

BTW I take offense to your side comment about Jesus and Mohammed.

Why? If your're a Moslem then you don't believe in Christ and relegate him to the role of minor theological player. If you're a Christian you probably think he'd kick his ass too.

If you are an atheist or and agnostic...or, har har "open-minded"... it shouldn't bother you at all as you don't believe in the divinity of Christ or theological role of Mohammed. Who, then, appointed you keeper of the sacred flame?

 

[Law2Doc]

My other point is that the unless the point of asking you what historical figure you'd want to spend the day with is to identify and select against the most popous ass in the room, questions like that are pointless and are typical of the kind of psycho-babble that has permeated the medical profession.

That's exactly why I would suggest staying away from philosphers, religious icons, hitlers, etc. Focus on folks related to mediicne and medical history or books inspiration to medicine. From that launch pad, in a very short step, you can use this as an entree as to why you are interested in or excited by medicine. Talk about the discoverers of the genetic code, or the founder of the field of medicine you might be interested in (as mota suggested above, Freud could actually be a good choice). There are a million other such figures, so you needn't pick one that is overdone -- just do some research. That way, you don't come off as pompous and flaunting your knowledge of arcane facts greek prose, nor do you sound like you missed the point and are using the question to preach your religious views. The goal of the med school application process is to decide who would be a good fit for med school, and someone who is really into medicine and enthusiastic about medicine (without being fake) tends to be looked on favorably.

 

[8744]

Your dog is more interesting than Ghandi? Ha! I would love to sit and eat with Ghandi, if only to dissect his brain on the current state of religious strife in India and around the world. Besides, dogs are slobbery and smelly and drink from toilet bowls. 😀

Hey, Ghandi had a lot of disgusting habits including drinking a pint of his own urine every day. At least my dogs drink from flushed toilets and the toilet cake makes their breath smell minty.

I also understand from reading his biography that he was something of a pendant and droned on about every subject in the world from feminine hygiene to making butter.

That famous movie with Ben Kingsley (?) is the extent of what most people know about Ghandi and if you must know, the Indian Government was deeply involved in the project to ensure that Ghandi was completely beatified.

 

[8744]

That's exactly why I would suggest staying away from philosphers, religious icons, hitlers, etc. Focus on folks related to mediicne and medical history or books inspiration to medicine. From that launch pad, in a very short step, you can use this as an entree as to why you are interested in or excited by medicine. Talk about the discoverers of the genetic code, or the founder of the field of medicine you might be interested in (as mota suggested above, Freud could actually be a good choice). There are a million other such figures, so you needn't pick one that is overdone -- just do some research. That way, you don't come off as pompous and flaunting your knowledge of arcane facts greek prose, nor do you sound like you missed the point and are using the question to preach your religious views. The goal of the med school application process is to decide who would be a good fit for med school, and someone who is really into medicine and enthusiastic about medicine (without being fake) tends to be looked on favorably.

That is the first sensible thing anybody has said on the suubject.

 

[docbill]

Why? If your're a Moslem then you don't believe in Christ and relegate him to the role of minor theological player. If you're a Christian you probably think he'd kick his ass too.

If you are an atheist or and agnostic...or, har har "open-minded"... it shouldn't bother you at all as you don't believe in the divinity of Christ or theological role of Mohammed. Who, then, appointed you keeper of the sacred flame?

Its actually spelled "Muslim" and NOT "Moslem"!!!

The reason your statement is childish, is because clearly both of these, either "men" , "God", or "prophets", would not fight. Remember they both believe in peace and forgivenes.

 

[THP]

Besides, Jesus would kick Mohammed's ass.

I think someone should create a poll. That would be good.

 

[THP]

A little off topic but . . . While interviewing at the school I currently attend I discussing some of my experiencing doing the mandatory volunteering that is required for your application to even be entertained. I accidentally got on the topic of illegal aliens and their fantastic free healthcare, and how if I tried to pull the same stunt the govt would hunt me down and garnish my wages. Needless to say my blood pressure went sky high because I knew I stepped in it. Luckily the guy agreed with me.

In sum, don't bring it up.