"

The J.D. is not a doctoral level degree. That someone chooses to call it that means nothing. There is at least one college that calls all of it B.S.-level alumnae ""doctor"" because of some tradition, akin to the Italian use of Dottore. Everyone agreed that the old D.Pharm., before the recent changes, was a master's-level degree. When I see surveys of ""highest level of education completed"" I often see the J.D. lumped with professional master's degrees like a M.Arch. (usually 2-3 years) or M.S.W. or the like. The D.C. was often lumped in there, but they're made an effort to get more people to have completed a B.S. first to raise their standing, as pharmacy is trying to do. As mentioned, in many fields the terminal degree is a master's, for example in many artistic fields (M.F.A.). I clearly recall arguments, reported in The Chronicle of Higher Ed., over whether a J.D. holder should be a university's president given the lack of a terminal/doctoral degree. I also point out that following a J.D. one still takes a master's or (higher) doctorate as the next step, if desired. In my experience, J.D. holders occasionally use ""Doctor"" in very formal settings in academiaif speaking at a graduation ceremonybut for the most part, no. Certainly, I consider them to have a degree that is the equivalent of a 3-year M.Arch. Since there is no pre-law curriculum, it just isn't comparable  to a Ph.D. biologist who took a B.S. and M.S. in the same subject.  "