Professionals given no credit on forums..

[Keegan Shields]

Jack,

You might be interested in this book: "The Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters".

https://www.amazon.com/Death-Experti.../dp/0190469412

Its a great read. We are all guilty of this in various areas of our life.

"Tom Nichols' The Death of Expertise shows how this rejection of experts has occurred: the openness of the internet, the emergence of a customer satisfaction model in higher education, and the transformation of the news industry into a 24-hour entertainment machine, among other reasons. Paradoxically, the increasingly democratic dissemination of information, rather than producing an educated public, has instead created an army of ill-informed and angry citizens who denounce intellectual achievement."

[Edward Weber]

Thanks for the link

[Patty Hann]

Yes, thank you for that link.

[Cameron Wood]

I didn't read the book, but read a bunch of Amazon reviews, which tend to pull no punches, and must be taken with salt IME:

Representative of the critical ones:

The book is derived from the author's impression that "...within my living memory I've never seen anything like it.". It reads like an extended Facebook rant by your cranky uncle, and, as it turns out, the book is actually an expansion of a blog post the author wrote in 2013.

Perhaps I could give the book some leeway if Mr. Nichols was an expert in social science, or some topic that would give him authority in the "disregard for expertise", but he is a professor of National Security Affairs. Ironically, because he is not an expert in this area, I found myself disregarding his opinions.

The Death of Expertise is a perfect example of why people do disregard experts. The book FEELS like fact, but it is not. The author presents no evidence to back up the book's premise of an increase in disregard for expertise. You feel like you should trust his opinion, because it is in a book after all. People will cite the book, as if it were fact. And because so many people are saying it, it starts to feel like fact. But Mr. Nichols opinion is no more fact than your cranky uncle's last Facebook post.

[Edward Weber]

I didn't read the book, but read a bunch of Amazon reviews, which tend to pull no punches, and must be taken with salt IME:

Representative of the critical ones:

The book is derived from the author's impression that "...within my living memory I've never seen anything like it.". It reads like an extended Facebook rant by your cranky uncle, and, as it turns out, the book is actually an expansion of a blog post the author wrote in 2013.

Perhaps I could give the book some leeway if Mr. Nichols was an expert in social science, or some topic that would give him authority in the "disregard for expertise", but he is a professor of National Security Affairs. Ironically, because he is not an expert in this area, I found myself disregarding his opinions.

The Death of Expertise is a perfect example of why people do disregard experts. The book FEELS like fact, but it is not. The author presents no evidence to back up the book's premise of an increase in disregard for expertise. You feel like you should trust his opinion, because it is in a book after all. People will cite the book, as if it were fact. And because so many people are saying it, it starts to feel like fact. But Mr. Nichols opinion is no more fact than your cranky uncle's last Facebook post.

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

[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

No, I feel that the quote is representative of the critical reviews on Amazon.

Definitely decide for yourself, & if you read the book, share your opinion.

Edit: I did spend at least half an hour reading dozens of reviews, many lengthy and detailed, quoting passages of the book and also citing the reviewers' own credentials. Overall at least 2/3 are positive.

[Keegan Shields]

No, I feel that the quote is representative of the critical reviews on Amazon.

Definitely decide for yourself, & if you read the book, share your opinion.

Edit: I did spend at least half an hour reading dozens of reviews, many lengthy and detailed, quoting passages of the book and also citing the reviewers' own credentials. Overall at least 2/3 are positive.

Thanks for highlighting this Cameron. Its a fair criticism to consider. I think if you read the book, you would find that the author leans on his experience as an expert in the national security realm to illustrate his points about the growing distrust in experts over the last 40 years.

The book is not a peer reviewed study with quantitative data to prove out the assertions. But the author is logical in his approach, and I found it thought provoking.

[Cameron Wood]

Thanks for highlighting this Cameron. Its a fair criticism to consider. I think if you read the book, you would find that the author leans on his experience as an expert in the national security realm to illustrate his points about the growing distrust in experts over the last 40 years.

The book is not a peer reviewed study with quantitative data to prove out the assertions. But the author is logical in his approach, and I found it thought provoking.

All right, I ordered a copy & will check it out.

[Keith Outten]

All of us are smarter than any one of us!

In my mind this is the most valuable statement I have ever seen here in 21 years.
Thanks Ron

[Larry Edgerton]

I'm a woodworker. Professional? Who cares?

I have been on this earth long enough to know that if I disappear tomorrow what little bit of skill I may possess is of no consequence, and the world will turn.

Interesting conversation just the same.........

[Tom M King]

My friends that work for, and used to work for NASA say their definition of an expert is someone who has done something before.

I have no claim to being an expert because most days I’m doing something that I have never done before.

[Kevin Jenness]

My friends that work for, and used to work for NASA say their definition of an expert is someone who has done something before.

I have no claim to being an expert because most days I’m doing something that I have never done before.

I think an expert is someone prepared to do something they never have done before with a high likelihood of success.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Being an expert is not the same thing as being a professional. As others have pointed out, "professional" has different meanings as well. It may mean I do it for a living (I am a professional shoe shiner) or it may mean you are a member of a licensed profession (I am a licensed medical doctor, even if I choose to do research instead of treating illness).

An expert is someone who by way of education, training, or experience has more information about the given topic than their audience.

You can acquire expertise in multiple ways. I college I took astronomy classes, I have used basic techniques to precisely determine direction from celestial observations, I have read a biography of Columbus that described the navigation techniques he used, and this weekend I attended a presentation where some medieval devices were discussed and demonstrated. So I know a lot more about medieval methods of celestial navigation than the average person.

I might be an expert from the point of view of a boy scout group, but that does not mean I could usefully address astronomers at a conference.

Even if I could usefully address the astronomers, it would not make me an expert on infectious disease. The term is both topic and forum dependent.

[John Lifer]

Being an expert is not the same thing as being a professional. As others have pointed out, "professional" has different meanings as well. It may mean I do it for a living (I am a professional shoe shiner) or it may mean you are a member of a licensed profession (I am a licensed medical doctor, even if I choose to do research instead of treating illness).

An expert is someone who by way of education, training, or experience has more information about the given topic than their audience.

You can acquire expertise in multiple ways. I college I took astronomy classes, I have used basic techniques to precisely determine direction from celestial observations, I have read a biography of Columbus that described the navigation techniques he used, and this weekend I attended a presentation where some medieval devices were discussed and demonstrated. So I know a lot more about medieval methods of celestial navigation than the average person.

I might be an expert from the point of view of a boy scout group, but that does not mean I could usefully address astronomers at a conference.

Even if I could usefully address the astronomers, it would not make me an expert on infectious disease. The term is both topic and forum dependent.

I'll disagree somewhat with your definition of expert. In my opinion, you have to have a DEMONSTRATED expertise, not just be able to have more information. At least in most fields, you should be able to explain and demonstrate you know and have the ability to perform that expertise, and it isn't just being able to talk about it.
But yes, anyone can call themselves a professional or an expert and we can determine if that is accurate or not by their performance.
And I've seen plenty of professionals in many fields who are not experts.

[Edward Weber]

Being an expert is not the same thing as being a professional. As others have pointed out, "professional" has different meanings as well. It may mean I do it for a living (I am a professional shoe shiner) or it may mean you are a member of a licensed profession (I am a licensed medical doctor, even if I choose to do research instead of treating illness).

An expert is someone who by way of education, training, or experience has more information about the given topic than their audience.

You can acquire expertise in multiple ways. I college I took astronomy classes, I have used basic techniques to precisely determine direction from celestial observations, I have read a biography of Columbus that described the navigation techniques he used, and this weekend I attended a presentation where some medieval devices were discussed and demonstrated. So I know a lot more about medieval methods of celestial navigation than the average person.

I might be an expert from the point of view of a boy scout group, but that does not mean I could usefully address astronomers at a conference.

Even if I could usefully address the astronomers, it would not make me an expert on infectious disease. The term is both topic and forum dependent.

A well made statement, which leads to the problem we're having today, as I see it.
You are self aware enough to know what your limitations are and what to do to learn more from "experts" in the field.
While you wouldn't feel comfortable in addressing the astronomers, there are many on YT that put themselves out there in order to show what they know, regardless of how much that is. These "content creators", present to many, as some sort of voice of authority and sadly are often afforded the same level of esteem as someone (professional/expert) who has spent their entire working career in that field.
This is the point where everyone becomes an expert. The lack of critical thinking on the viewers part, has people believing anything they see or hear, no matter the source and they take it as gospel.
While it can be a matter of perspective, where you are on the scale, there are those who have no business presenting to, or instructing others.
To the OP's point, I would say simply dismissing experts, professionals or however you categorize them is dangerous, not to mention foolish. Putting them all on the same level is no different.