I mean that even if doctors and software engineers learn the same amount in school, a "standard" education would still be more useful for a doctor than for an engineer, because an officially recognized title of "doctor" has more legal implications (for prescriptions, insurance, reimbursements, lawsuits, etc.). A hospital that hires someone without a medical degree to work as a doctor is taking a much bigger risk than a software company that hires someone without an engineering degree, even if in both cases the person is as skilled as someone with a degree (I expect lawyers would be in the same basket as doctors here).
At least, that would be my answer to "why Thiel assumes a "standard" education is useful for doctors but dismisses it for other specializations."
Sorry. I've slept on this, and I still don't see the relevance of lawsuits.
Thiel says: "For some people, such as future doctors, the time and cost of four years of college may be worth it." That statement isn't about the people who hire future doctors, who can cover their collective asses by ensuring they have someone who has the proper sanction from the state. It isn't about the clients of future doctors either, or any other stakeholder population who might prefer that doctors hold a degree.
The statement is about the doctors, and what would be worthwhile to them.
Peter Thiel is offering another round of "20 under 20" Fellowships. The application deadline is December 31st. We know many of the current Thiel fellows here in the Bay Area, and it's a great opportunity. Here's the official letter from the Thiel Foundation: