4 ms·
We're also seeing an increasing number of cases where high-profile experts are making high-profile claims that then fold in full public view; or experts that ma
by Fellshard 6y ago
We're also seeing an increasing number of cases where high-profile experts are making high-profile claims that then fold in full public view; or experts that make contradictory claims, under which case: from the perspective of a non-expert, who's right?
Education is essential, and yet is not a panacea for thinking well. So when experts can't seem to give people a straight answer, they'll simply turn to their peer group and hope for the best. And right now, as you noted, peer groups primarily consist of highly self-selected social media groups.
- watwut 6y agoFirst problem is expecting expert answer to be simple, easy to understand, without asterisks and conditions. Experts often disagree about nuances or have competing theories. Second issue is tendency to take the first confident guy with simple answer as expert. The folding expert is pretty often not considered expert by people who deal with the field - he is typically just someone confident and well spoken.
- Fellshard 6y agoAnd how is the layman supposed to differentiate between the two? It's a fairly intractable problem. Credentializing ends up having the opposite effect of creating an orthodoxy that freezes the ability to think.
- watwut 6y agoWell, credentials would be one thing. The lack of credentials sometimes is not grave, but most of confident non experts don't have right ones. They may be experts on something else. Second thing is, if too many credentialed people object, there might be issue. Third, lack of nuance, lack of asterisk and too much confidence are bad signs.