U2_rocks!
<font color=coral>The DISer formerly known as U2_r
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 3,469
There is no way this isn't going to come off as pretentious, but: having met two presidents, you absolutely refer to them as Mr. President or President X. Also, having met or worked with a number of the titles you mentioned, I've always used titles: Congressman Smith, Madame Ambassador, etc.
I'd argue that it's fine to refer to them in the third person by plain titles (e.g. Mr. Obama, Mr. Barzun, Ms. Pelosi), but when addressing an officeholder directly, you refer to them with proper titles.
I would also argue that, with few exceptions, correcting people as to your title is generally quite rude. This, however, is predicated on the idea that people won't make a giant fuss about basic rules of politeness and addresses you by the proper title to begin with.
Let's put it this way: if someone calls you Mr. Dancer, it's gracious to say "No, call me Jim." If someone calls you Jim, in most situations it's tricky to say, "Please call me Mr. Dancer." Manners are about making things easy for those around you. You don't want to put someone in the situation of having to choose between being persnickety or being called the right thing. So the default is to be more formal, at which point the person with whom you're speaking can insist on informality if they so choose. It's not hard--it's about thinking of others.
This is how I was raised and how I still am.
And as for the original question, if I know that an acquaintance is generally referred to as Dr., whether by virtue of a medical degree or a PhD, I am going to call them Dr., unless they tell me otherwise. I don't put "Dr" above "Mr" - they are just different titles. Same way a "Miss" becomes a "Mrs." when a certain event in her life occurs (marriage), a "Mr." may become a "Dr." under certain conditions, or maybe a "Sir" or "Lord" or a "Senator".