Professionals given no credit on forums..

[mike stenson]

...there oughta be a law....

[Cameron Wood]

You didn't read the book but you feel that reading a review on amazon is representative of it's content, it's author and so on.
Thanks, but I'll decide for myself

So I read the book- well, somewhat skimmed the second half.

After wading through the 29 pages of preface and introduction, I found the first third a scattershot restatement of his thesis. The middle is a somewhat engaging critique of higher education- his strong suit, as a professor.

The balance covers the internet, journalism, errors of experts, and conclusion.

The book as a whole sounds the alarm of a new and increasing issue largely related to the internet and "instant experts", but also clearly establishes that it is not new at all. Personally, my own resistance to experts stems largely from the '60s/Vietnam era- long before the internet.

In one passage that I found striking- kind of damning really, he discusses college students thinking that they are on an equal footing with their professors.

"When I first arrived at Dartmouth at the end of the1980s, I was told a story about a well-known (and, at the time, still living) member of the faculty that in a small way illustrates this problem and the challenge it presents to experts and educators. The renowned astro-physicist Robert Jastrow gave a lecture on President Ronald Reagan's plan to develop space-based missile defenses, which he strongly supported. An undergraduate challenged Jastrow during the question-and-answer period, and by all accounts Jastrow was patient but held to his belief that such a program was possible and necessary. The student, realizing that a scientist at a major university was not going to change his mind after a few minutes of arguing with a sophomore, finally shrugged and gave up. "Well," the student said, "your guess is as good as mine." Jastrow stopped the young man short. "No, no, no," he said emphatically, "My guesses are much, much better than yours.""

Since the book was published in 2017, the author should have been aware that detailed study and peer review concluded that the Strategic Defense Initiative was in fact not possible nor necessary and that it was a dangerous boondoggle with no chance of success. So the example shows that in this case, the student's guess was in fact better than the experts'. If I was the author, I would be embarrassed by this.

Overall, the book states a problem but offers few solutions, and largely is the author's (valid) complaint about the ill prepared and entitled state of college students, attending schools that cater to them. It did provide several words new to me, including one requiring the unabridged dictionary (solipsistic). Two and a half stars.

[Edward Weber]

So I read the book- well, somewhat skimmed the second half.

After wading through the 29 pages of preface and introduction, I found the first third a scattershot restatement of his thesis. The middle is a somewhat engaging critique of higher education- his strong suit, as a professor.

The balance covers the internet, journalism, errors of experts, and conclusion.

The book as a whole sounds the alarm of a new and increasing issue largely related to the internet and "instant experts", but also clearly establishes that it is not new at all. Personally, my own resistance to experts stems largely from the '60s/Vietnam era- long before the internet.

In one passage that I found striking- kind of damning really, he discusses college students thinking that they are on an equal footing with their professors.

"When I first arrived at Dartmouth at the end of the1980s, I was told a story about a well-known (and, at the time, still living) member of the faculty that in a small way illustrates this problem and the challenge it presents to experts and educators. The renowned astro-physicist Robert Jastrow gave a lecture on President Ronald Reagan's plan to develop space-based missile defenses, which he strongly supported. An undergraduate challenged Jastrow during the question-and-answer period, and by all accounts Jastrow was patient but held to his belief that such a program was possible and necessary. The student, realizing that a scientist at a major university was not going to change his mind after a few minutes of arguing with a sophomore, finally shrugged and gave up. "Well," the student said, "your guess is as good as mine." Jastrow stopped the young man short. "No, no, no," he said emphatically, "My guesses are much, much better than yours.""

Since the book was published in 2017, the author should have been aware that detailed study and peer review concluded that the Strategic Defense Initiative was in fact not possible nor necessary and that it was a dangerous boondoggle with no chance of success. So the example shows that in this case, the student's guess was in fact better than the experts'. If I was the author, I would be embarrassed by this.

Overall, the book states a problem but offers few solutions, and largely is the author's (valid) complaint about the ill prepared and entitled state of college students, attending schools that cater to them. It did provide several words new to me, including one requiring the unabridged dictionary (solipsistic). Two and a half stars.

While the basic premise isn't new, how it's received is. What used to takes months, now takes minutes or even seconds. People constantly tweeting and posting fact free videos, even the best minds can get silenced, misrepresented or ignored in one news cycle. The damage that's done in seconds can takes a long time to undo.


The point, is that a professor with multiple degrees in physics, who worked at NASA and GISS to name a couple, might have a better guess, due to his years of study and work experience in the field, than a sophomore student does.

This is the "I know as much as the experts" nonsense that is prevalent today.

You say STI was a boondoggle, but we now have everything that was outlined in the original vision of STI. I would say it was a vision ahead of it's time, we could do it now. Whether or not to do it, comes down to politics, the cold war is over, the need has passed.

We will agree to disagree

[Carl Beckett]

You are self aware enough to know what your limitations are and what to do to learn more from "experts" in the field.

I have had the privilege of interacting with some true experts. Professionals. And insanely smart people (Nobel prize winning level). The level of knowledge seems to be inversely proportional to what they purport to understand.

Meaning the smarter or more knowledgeable they are, the more they highlight just how little they know. Ultimately all they talk about is just how little understanding there is on complex/difficult subjects. And they include their own limited understanding in that.

Which word is used (expert vs professional vs guru vs zen master... doesnt really matter imo). One of my fav quotes:

The fish trap exists because of the fish. Once you've gotten the fish you can forget the trap. The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit. Once you've gotten the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of meaning. Once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten words so I can talk with him? ― Zhuangzi

[Edward Weber]

The fish trap exists because of the fish. Once you've gotten the fish you can forget the trap. The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit. Once you've gotten the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of meaning. Once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten words so I can talk with him? ― Zhuangzi

I hadn't heard that one before, very good

[Jim Becker]

I have had the privilege of interacting with some true experts. Professionals. And insanely smart people (Nobel prize winning level). The level of knowledge seems to be inversely proportional to what they purport to understand.

Meaning the smarter or more knowledgeable they are, the more they highlight just how little they know. Ultimately all they talk about is just how little understanding there is on complex/difficult subjects. And they include their own limited understanding in that.

Which word is used (expert vs professional vs guru vs zen master... doesnt really matter imo). One of my fav quotes:

The fish trap exists because of the fish. Once you've gotten the fish you can forget the trap. The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit. Once you've gotten the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of meaning. Once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten words so I can talk with him? ― Zhuangzi

One of Professor Dr. SWMBO's "partners in crime" back when she was involved in research relative to Hep-B and Liver Cancer was indeed an actual Nobel Prize winner. What you described was absolutely him in every way. I only met him once, but even that single interaction was so enjoyable.

I agree with Edward about the quote. Outstanding perspective.

[Bill Howatt]

That's because they are smart enough to know what they don't know.

[Edward Weber]

That's because they are smart enough to know what they don't know.

The opposite of Dunning-Kruger

[mike stenson]

The opposite of Dunning-Kruger

no, it's just part of the curve.

[Edward Weber]

no, it's just part of the curve.

The opposite end

[mike stenson]

The opposite end

Knowing enough that you're aware of what you might not know.. is in the middle of the curve. Confidence, amongst actual experts, is again high.

[Mark Hennebury]

I remember a conversation that I had with Chris Hall where we were discussing a cabinet that he had made and documented on his blog, he mentioned how a very visible part of the cabinet was a very complex puzzle for those not familiar with the construction, and how he purposely never explained how it was done. No one questioned it, which he found curious. I told him that it is lonely at the top.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

A little learning is a dang'rous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.

Fir'd at first sight with what the Muse imparts,
In fearless youth we tempt the heights of arts,
While from the bounded level of our mind,
Short views we take, nor see the lengths behind,
But more advanc'd, behold with strange surprise
New, distant scenes of endless science rise!

So pleas'd at first, the tow'ring Alps we try,
Mount o'er the vales, and seem to tread the sky;
Th' eternal snows appear already past,
And the first clouds and mountains seem the last;
But those attain'd, we tremble to survey
The growing labours of the lengthen'd way,
Th' increasing prospect tires our wand'ring eyes,
Hills peep o'er hills, and Alps on Alps arise!

[Keegan Shields]

What can get experts into trouble is when they believe themselves to be experts outside of their expert area.

Here is a great example (and cautionary tale) from the book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling

Brilliant, Nobel prize winning chemist, also a quack promoter of Vitamin C.

[Edward Weber]

I remember a conversation that I had with Chris Hall where we were discussing a cabinet that he had made and documented on his blog, he mentioned how a very visible part of the cabinet was a very complex puzzle for those not familiar with the construction, and how he purposely never explained how it was done. No one questioned it, which he found curious. I told him that it is lonely at the top.

They we're probably afraid of sounding stupid asking the question.
There is no shame in not knowing something, if you don't ask, you don't learn