Division

You may argue specialization, although does make the rich in knowledge eat at very separate tables, is the inevitable result of medical advance in the past twenty or thirty years.

That may be true. In fact, it is quite impossible nowadays to master all aspects of internal medicine by one person. And, seriously, it is actually rather difficult now to stay tuned in every aspects of a single medical specialty – for example, cardiology or nephrology.

(I made a similar comment last year. See http://ccszeto.blogspot.com/2010/10/divison.html)

Or, as Adam Smith put it, the greatest improvement in the productive powers (in the history of human) have been the effects of the division of labour.

But, hold on. Don’t follow our giant of economy blindly. In fact, the author of The Wealth of Nations did not imply that all kinds of division of labour would always lead to an increase in productivity, and, in modern medical practice, division of labour is very often not meant to increase the productivity or efficiency of medical care, but to achieve skill monopoly, or to evade responsibility.

I shouldn't say any more.