Food for thought

[tundramanq]

Sounds like Advanced Upsidedown Underwater Basket Weaving - the only paying market for it is teaching it to nieve students. Mom and Pop need to see where their money is spent on their kids education. It's a lot of cash for a minimum wage job at McDonalds.
The US is desperate for all engineering degrees, but the public schools aren't teaching the basics required to even be considered for admission.

[Spartan Tartan]

As was said earlier, trust is important when discussing expertise. There are several ways to establish trust--one example is tobget a professional society credential. Another, for XMTS and other less professionally rigid constructs, I like to see who says what and evaluate a person's expertise by what they say and how the behave/interact.

Another point which I have not yet seen is the matter of relevance. Not picking on PhDs, but if your field of study is mathematics then your expertise is not relevant to a sociology person. Not directly anyway.

Moreover, relevance is from MY point of view. If your expertise is not consistent with my world view, then it is not relevant. So, in that regard, TO ME, one is not an expert. No matter their credential or establisged experience, if Ibdo not aspire to be like that person then their expertise is not anything I am concerned with.

Correct me if I am wrong, but a dissertation board consists if experts in a particular field assessing a new potential experts contribution, no? Put a non-related expert on that board and one could argue all those years if research were wasted...at least not appreciated by the "right" expert.

[Lyle1]

As was said earlier, trust is important when discussing expertise. There are several ways to establish trust--one example is tobget a professional society credential. Another, for XMTS and other less professionally rigid constructs, I like to see who says what and evaluate a person's expertise by what they say and how the behave/interact.

Another point which I have not yet seen is the matter of relevance. Not picking on PhDs, but if your field of study is mathematics then your expertise is not relevant to a sociology person. Not directly anyway.

Moreover, relevance is from MY point of view. If your expertise is not consistent with my world view, then it is not relevant. So, in that regard, TO ME, one is not an expert. No matter their credential or establisged experience, if Ibdo not aspire to be like that person then their expertise is not anything I am concerned with.

Correct me if I am wrong, but a dissertation board consists if experts in a particular field assessing a new potential experts contribution, no? Put a non-related expert on that board and one could argue all those years if research were wasted...at least not appreciated by the "right" expert.

I agree with a lot of what you say. Trust, based on experience, is necessary in order to accept that a person knows what he is talking about, or that what he is saying is a t least relevant to the topic at hand. Creating a new credentialing process to provide credence to a profession is not really worth the effort. i worked in two professions that tried that, and in the end, the credentials did nothing to convince the nay sayers that the professions were real.

That said, a PhD in mathematics does not indicate that an individual has any expertise in sociology, but he might have picked up a lot of expertise through life experience.

If you have a reason, even gut instinct, not to trust someone's opinion, then you probably should not trust them. Agendas can come into play in a discussion as much as facts and theories.

Sadly, I think we often accept the expert who most often says what we want to hear.

[Bugbear]

You all should try being useless: it's worth the effort.

[CDNSushi]

This thread reminds me of a philosophical problem I heard recently:

Does a single individual who doesn't know what he's talking about, know more or less than two people who don't know what they're talking about?

[unixken]

This thread reminds me of a philosophical problem I heard recently:

Does a single individual who doesn't know what he's talking about, know more or less than two people who don't know what they're talking about?

Does a 4 cylinder engine take half as long to warm up as an 8 cylinder engine? Or twice as long?

I myself can not design nor build a pocket watch. But I can still tell the time no less well than the designers/builders of a cesium-isotope atomic clock. It's time for me to get ready for work. ;)

[Steve Ashton]

The true philosophical conundrum we are still faced with is:

If a man who is an expert speaks while in the woods,
and there is no woman around to hear him,
is he still wrong?

[David Thorpe]

The true philosophical conundrum we are still faced with is:

If a man who is an expert speaks while in the woods,
and there is no woman around to hear him,
is he still wrong?

Emphatically yes, according to my lovely bride.

[tundramanq]

Thanks guys - You started my day rolling on the floor - before coffee.

[Father Bill]

I continue to be disappointed at the hatred and distrust of expertise in our society, often by those who don't have it. The fact that one doesn't understand an expert is indeed an indication of a communication gap. The question is, "Who owns the gap?"

This public mood swing seems to have come with the post-modern assertion that all opinions are equal. To be honest, when undergoing open-heart surgery, I would like to think that my surgeon had been trained by an expert, (and yes, one who was able to communicate that expertise) but not by someone whose opinion was merely deemed "equal."

And yes, folks, having been educated by a vast array of PhDs, I admit that I actually understood and appreciated them all. Do I need to apologize for that?

I wonder if the hatred of experts is a new "racism" or just sour grapes... and now that I've made myself so very popular, it's time to shave and shower!