"The Confidence of the Dumb" (The Death of Expertise)

[VirginiaCougar]

I know this will likely come off badly with some, but I was struck by the truthfulness of many of the author's arguments on political/policy discussions.

http://thefederalist.com/2014/01/17/...-of-expertise/

Excerpt to whet your appetite to read and discuss the rest:

"I fear we are witnessing the “death of expertise”: a Google-fueled, Wikipedia-based, blog-sodden collapse of any division between professionals and laymen, students and teachers, knowers and wonderers – in other words, between those of any achievement in an area and those with none at all. By this, I do not mean the death of actual expertise, the knowledge of specific things that sets some people apart from others in various areas. There will always be doctors, lawyers, engineers, and other specialists in various fields. Rather, what I fear has died is any acknowledgement of expertise as anything that should alter our thoughts or change the way we live...

Critics might dismiss all this by saying that everyone has a right to participate in the public sphere. That’s true. But every discussion must take place within limits and above a certain baseline of competence. And competence is sorely lacking in the public arena. People with strong views on going to war in other countries can barely find their own nation on a map; people who want to punish Congress for this or that law can’t name their own member of the House.

None of this ignorance stops people from arguing as though they are research scientists. Tackle a complex policy issue with a layman today, and you will get snippy and sophistic demands to show ever increasing amounts of “proof” or “evidence” for your case, even though the ordinary interlocutor in such debates isn’t really equipped to decide what constitutes “evidence” or to know it when it’s presented. The use of evidence is a specialized form of knowledge that takes a long time to learn, which is why articles and books are subjected to “peer review” and not to “everyone review,” but don’t tell that to someone hectoring you about the how things really work in Moscow or Beijing or Washington.

This subverts any real hope of a conversation, because it is simply exhausting..."

[Pelado]

I know this will likely come off badly with some, but I was struck by the truthfulness of many of the author's arguments on political/policy discussions.

http://thefederalist.com/2014/01/17/...-of-expertise/

Excerpt to whet your appetite to read and discuss the rest:

"I fear we are witnessing the “death of expertise”: a Google-fueled, Wikipedia-based, blog-sodden collapse of any division between professionals and laymen, students and teachers, knowers and wonderers – in other words, between those of any achievement in an area and those with none at all. By this, I do not mean the death of actual expertise, the knowledge of specific things that sets some people apart from others in various areas. There will always be doctors, lawyers, engineers, and other specialists in various fields. Rather, what I fear has died is any acknowledgement of expertise as anything that should alter our thoughts or change the way we live...

Critics might dismiss all this by saying that everyone has a right to participate in the public sphere. That’s true. But every discussion must take place within limits and above a certain baseline of competence. And competence is sorely lacking in the public arena. People with strong views on going to war in other countries can barely find their own nation on a map; people who want to punish Congress for this or that law can’t name their own member of the House.

None of this ignorance stops people from arguing as though they are research scientists. Tackle a complex policy issue with a layman today, and you will get snippy and sophistic demands to show ever increasing amounts of “proof” or “evidence” for your case, even though the ordinary interlocutor in such debates isn’t really equipped to decide what constitutes “evidence” or to know it when it’s presented. The use of evidence is a specialized form of knowledge that takes a long time to learn, which is why articles and books are subjected to “peer review” and not to “everyone review,” but don’t tell that to someone hectoring you about the how things really work in Moscow or Beijing or Washington.

This subverts any real hope of a conversation, because it is simply exhausting..."

I don't really disagree with anything in the excerpt.

Having equal rights does not mean having equal talents, equal abilities, or equal knowledge. It assuredly does not mean that “everyone’s opinion about anything is as good as anyone else’s.” And yet, this is now enshrined as the credo of a fair number of people despite being obvious nonsense.

Nice quantification of the subset. Most in the country are not included in that subset. Most prefer their own opinion over that of others, without regard to qualifications or expertise.

[TripletDaddy]

I find nothing offensive in what you have shared. We see it on our message board all the time: people cutting and pasting things that are easily accessible via wikipedia or otherwise passing off things as though they were original thought or expertise on various matters. "The Confidence of the Dumb" is actually a great title and apt descriptor for what happens online, both here and elsewhere.

[YOhio]

I find nothing offensive in what you have shared. We see it on our message board all the time: people cutting and pasting things that are easily accessible via wikipedia or otherwise passing off things as though they were original thought or expertise on various matters. "The Confidence of the Dumb" is actually a great title and apt descriptor for what happens online, both here and elsewhere.

Happens all the time. Prime example is SU and Lebowski talking about the Roman siege of Jerusalem. It's like they're swapping turns pasting wiki paragraphs.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Happens all the time. Prime example is SU and Lebowski talking about the Roman siege of Jerusalem. It's like they're swapping turns pasting wiki paragraphs.

gfy




(I typed that myself!)