Semantics.

Herbalist vs. phytotherapist.

There's a thread over on the herbwifery forum asking, "What do we call ourselves?".

Over here, there are two choices:
1) you're a phytotherapist ("fytoterapeutti")
2) you're a herbalist ("yrttiterapeutti" - the straight translation of which is "herbal therapist").

Now, I teach herbalism at a two-year school for alternative practitioners. If they take all of my weeks (5-7, depending) plus a few others, of herbs, they can call themselves "phytotherapists". Or at least, that's what their diploma says.

Anybody trying to call me a phytotherapist might get hurt.

I'm a practical, down to earth, hands-on, holistic herbalist. To me, plants are important, constituents aren't (well, mostly). And to me, people are important, scientific research isn't (well - mostly).

Phytotherapists are overly interested in single constituents and "unbiased" "scientific" research on herbs, and they might never have seen the plants they're giving to their clients.
My students don't have those handicaps, nevermind what their diploma says.

Calling yourself a phytotherapist is a bad idea on another level: people who talk in complicated words where simple language works usually try to cover up that they don't have any idea what they're talking about. See, if nobody can understand you, they can't follow your thinking, and thus cannot twig onto the fact that your thinking is muddled.

No, keep to clear simple language wherever possible. That way, people understand you, understand what you're trying to teach them, and learn something. And, every now and then, they'll tell you that you're outright wrong, and you learn something.

And that last bit is one part of why I love to teach.