4 ms·

How many books does one have to put out on a subject before you decide they can be called an expert? (https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/17151107.John_McWhor

How many books does one have to put out on a subject before you decide they can be called an expert? (https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/17151107.John_McWhorter https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/17151107.John_McWhorte...) John McWhorter (and Glen Loury) have hosted a podcast for 14 years on the issue of race in America. You may not like what they have to say, but to say they aren't 'qualified' is ridiculous and it denigrates their work. They are as capable of lending insight into the enigma that is 21st century Black America as any living person.

pseudalopex 6y ago
I don't know if John McWhorter is an expert on racial politics. I do know having opinions and a platform isn't the same thing.
- f154hfds 6y ago
  I have opinions on you, but I wouldn't call myself an expert. If, however, I held a podcast on you discussing your actions and behaviors for 14 years, and had written 4 books chronicling your exploits (not including a new one about to be published) and had reached hundreds of thousands of people with a robust interpretation of who you are and what you care about - I'd say most would call me an expert? If some random person on the internet refused to call me an expert after devoting such an extensive portion of my life to understanding you, does that say more about them or about me? This whole credentialism has got to stop. If you don't want to hear opposing ideology so be it but flippantly saying McWhorter's ideas aren't worth your time because he doesn't have a sociology PhD is offensive.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    I said nothing about credentials. Or if his ideas are worth my time. This article is full of straw men but I'd give him another chance. I just said opinions and a platform don't prove expertise. You could pontificate about me for 14 years without learning more than you know now. Saying robust interpretation just begs the question.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> How many books does one have to put out on a subject before you decide they can be called an expert? Number of books “put out” (especially for popular audiences) doesn't distinguish between actual experts on subject matter from hacks that are good at telling a story people in positions of privilege like to hear. Except perhaps negatively, as it's a whole lot less work to produce volume if you are worried only about the latter, if you are a skilled storyteller. > John McWhorter (and Glen Loury) have hosted a podcast for 14 years on the issue of race in America. Yes, and that's very good evidence that he is a storyteller that is good at connecting a narrative to an audience. “Successful pundit” and “expert” are not entirely non-overlapping categories, but membership in one of them rarely has much bearing on the other.

pseudalopex 6y ago

I don't know if John McWhorter is an expert on racial politics. I do know having opinions and a platform isn't the same thing.

f154hfds 6y ago
I have opinions on you, but I wouldn't call myself an expert. If, however, I held a podcast on you discussing your actions and behaviors for 14 years, and had written 4 books chronicling your exploits (not including a new one about to be published) and had reached hundreds of thousands of people with a robust interpretation of who you are and what you care about - I'd say most would call me an expert? If some random person on the internet refused to call me an expert after devoting such an extensive portion of my life to understanding you, does that say more about them or about me? This whole credentialism has got to stop. If you don't want to hear opposing ideology so be it but flippantly saying McWhorter's ideas aren't worth your time because he doesn't have a sociology PhD is offensive.
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  I said nothing about credentials. Or if his ideas are worth my time. This article is full of straw men but I'd give him another chance. I just said opinions and a platform don't prove expertise. You could pontificate about me for 14 years without learning more than you know now. Saying robust interpretation just begs the question.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> How many books does one have to put out on a subject before you decide they can be called an expert? Number of books “put out” (especially for popular audiences) doesn't distinguish between actual experts on subject matter from hacks that are good at telling a story people in positions of privilege like to hear. Except perhaps negatively, as it's a whole lot less work to produce volume if you are worried only about the latter, if you are a skilled storyteller. > John McWhorter (and Glen Loury) have hosted a podcast for 14 years on the issue of race in America. Yes, and that's very good evidence that he is a storyteller that is good at connecting a narrative to an audience. “Successful pundit” and “expert” are not entirely non-overlapping categories, but membership in one of them rarely has much bearing on the other.