SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A US National Health Care System?

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (16168)4/6/2010 12:21:28 PM
From: Lane33 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) of 42652
 
How about posting something to demonstrate your expertise in something...??

You're making my case for me. It's all about the thrall of experts for some folks.

I'm expert in only a few arcane areas so there's not much there to demonstrate, even if I were so inclined. Very rarely on these threads do I assert expertise. In almost all subject areas I am pretty ignorant.

Now, where one is ignorant, there are a few choices on how to proceed. If the arena doesn't matter, you ignore it, seems to me. If it matters and you have analytical skills, you assess the credibility of the experts based on the quality of their arguments. If it matters but you don't have the skills to make that kind of assessment, then there are a few choices. What most people seem to do is judge the message based on their biases. If it resonates, they believe it. If it doesn't resonate, they consider it either unreliable or a lie. Another popular approach is to be awed by credentials and to buy whatever the credentialed have to say. A third common option is to throw up one's hands and just go with the flow. Unfortunately, another common approach is to regale the world with opinions regardless of ignorance.

My approach is to use my analytical skills. That is my strength. Where that is insufficient because the subject matter is simply too arcane, I make a judgment based on the quality of the presentation. Where that is insufficient due to the absence of a rationale, I weigh credibility based on the attitude of the expert. Statements against interest, in particular, afford a lot of credence. Any expert who flies the flag of his credentials I assume to be full of it. "Because I said so" didn't work for me when I was a kid with either my father or the Catholic Church and it doesn't work now with experts.

Which is why I am not impressed with the logical fallacy of appeals to authority so frequently used by posters. And why I am favorably impressed when posters offer rationales, even weak ones. And why I never assert authority that I don't solidly have.

Aren't you glad you asked?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext