Has this been posted up?

breamfisherbreamfisher Senior MemberPosts: 4,218 Senior Member
I can't seem to find it here.... An article on how "experts" are increasingly disregarded in today's society.

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

Edited to add: Yes, I know it's from the Federalist, but I think that the underlying points are valid. And, as an "expert" I've seen this same behavior. On this forum even, pre-crash, when discussing fisheries science...

Comments

  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 8,355 Senior Member
    I wonder if they argue with their physicians if they don't like the diagnoses.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,218 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    I wonder if they argue with their physicians if they don't like the diagnoses.
    Probably. Actually, I'm sure some do. I've known a few that do.

    I've also gotten into disagreements with folks about whether humans are primates are not, too.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,218 Senior Member
    Here's one to go along with the original article:

    http://theconversation.com/no-youre-not-entitled-to-your-opinion-9978
  • ouzelproouzelpro Senior Member Posts: 5,361 Senior Member
    Good quote there: "You're only entitled to what you can argue for."

    Dan Kahane of Yale has done research on why groups maintain positions even in the face of contrary evidence. He maintains that it is more important to agree with your cohort, than to change your view.

    http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2012/9/25/tragedy-of-the-science-communications-commons.html

    http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2014/2/14/culture-rationality-and-the-tragedy-of-the-science-communica.html

    BTW, I think your links are very good, I'm posting them to Facebook.
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,068 Senior Member
    Karen Hudes doesn't approve.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
  • Joe 4tehwin
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 2,833 Senior Member
    I can't seem to find it here.... An article on how "experts" are increasingly disregarded in today's society.

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

    Edited to add: Yes, I know it's from the Federalist, but I think that the underlying points are valid. And, as an "expert" I've seen this same behavior. On this forum even, pre-crash, when discussing fisheries science...

    I see your author is a self declared expert in war, no wonder he thinks other opinions don't matter.

    Tom Nichols is a professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College and an adjunct at the Harvard Extension School. He claims expertise in a lot of things, but his most recent book is No Use: Nuclear Weapons and U.S. National Security (Penn, 2014). The views expressed are entirely his own.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,218 Senior Member
    Ed,
    You didn't read the article, did you?
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 7,609 Senior Member
    I'm not familiar with the website and looked it up. For what some call a rabid, conservative site, I'd say you are correct about the validity of the points being made in the article. I'll try not to be the poster boy for the Dunning-Kruger effect. :)
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,201 Senior Member
    I wonder, how many climate science deniers do they have at The Federalist?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 7,609 Senior Member
    I'd like to know where we draw the line, assuming it could be done, between listening to the experts and expressing our own, often ignorant, opinions. Obviously we have a right to that expression, but ignorance does stand in the way of progress.

    Since the experts have a good batting record, despite the occasional mistake, do we assume that a majority of experts with the same opinion are more likely to be correct? Should policy be based on a majority of experts? I often hear claims that the majority of climate experts believe man has a strong influence on climate. Should our pollution policies follow the experts with some modification due to possible effects on the economy?
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,201 Senior Member
    Not just a majority, an overwhelming majority. 97%.

    I think we should acknowledge there is a problem, then choose policies based on that understanding.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • I wonder, how many climate science deniers do they have at The Federalist?

    FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDGE. is the guy's point valid or is it not?
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,218 Senior Member
    FishTX wrote: »
    I'd like to know where we draw the line, assuming it could be done, between listening to the experts and expressing our own, often ignorant, opinions. Obviously we have a right to that expression, but ignorance does stand in the way of progress.

    Since the experts have a good batting record, despite the occasional mistake, do we assume that a majority of experts with the same opinion are more likely to be correct? Should policy be based on a majority of experts? I often hear claims that the majority of climate experts believe man has a strong influence on climate. Should our pollution policies follow the experts with some modification due to possible effects on the economy?
    I'd say you'd fall back on the experts in the field but make your own decisions based on what you deem important. Science is ruled by consensus, but implicating a completely science-based policy is rarely practical. Most scientific experts I've talked with (admittedly a small number of the global whole, and most far down on the hierarchical food chain) would argue that it takes more than just the data to determine what is really "important." Partially because your can have conflicting benefits and consequences. So your policy makers would need to determine what you really want and set policy according to that.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,218 Senior Member
    I wonder, how many climate science deniers do they have at The Federalist?

    From the article:

    Most people I encounter, for example, have no idea what a non-sequitur is, or when they’re using one; nor do they understand the difference between generalizations and stereotypes.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,201 Senior Member
    sherb wrote: »
    FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDGE. is the guy's point valid or is it not?

    Yes, however I do not know what makes a person an expert on public policy. So excuse me if I still ask him to support his ideas with facts.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,201 Senior Member
    This for instance I agree with wholeheartedly.
    Some of it is purely due to the globalization of communication. There are no longer any gatekeepers: the journals and op-ed pages that were once strictly edited have been drowned under the weight of self-publishable blogs. There was once a time when participation in public debate, even in the pages of the local newspaper, required submission of a letter or an article, and that submission had to be written intelligently, pass editorial review, and stand with the author’s name attached. Even then, it was a big deal to get a letter in a major newspaper.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,218 Senior Member
    Yes, however I do not know what makes a person an expert on public policy. So excuse me if I still ask him to support his ideas with facts.
    How is the presence/absence of climate change deniers on the hosting website relevant to the author's qualifications or the ideas he has put forth?

    Again, I refer to my quote from the article.

    http://forums.flyfisherman.com/showthread.php?11920-Has-this-been-posted-up&p=160407&viewfull=1#post160407
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,201 Senior Member
    No and I did not claim that it did. I was wondering out loud and thinking about the irony.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,218 Senior Member
    No and I did not claim that it did. I was wondering out loud and thinking about the irony.
    Gotcha. I'd be willing to bet there are, and that extremely ironic. But it happens in other realms, too. I know of universities that have climatologists studying climate change who have other scientists (usually physicists or chemists) who don't believe in it. Either from an anthropogenic nature or even who doubts its existence.
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 8,355 Senior Member

    Up jumps Lazarus!

    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file