Being Credentialed

[soundjata]

Should doctors and plumbers be licensed?

No. Why should they?

 

[danjuno]

Credentials are as strong as the system that defines them.

Distrust in credentials is making the pursuit of any formal technical training a massive gamble. What's the point if you also need to competitively sweet talk yourself up? Conman's economy.

Agreed, lumping people with technical expertise in with "the establishment" is a key for scam artists.

 

[Birdjaguar]

No. Why should they?

How many surgeries have you had? Plumbing is more than gluing pipes together and once it is covered up, fixing it can be expensive. Licensing may not be perfect, but it is protection against crooks and scammers.

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

Plumbing is something I leave to the professionals. As is electricity.

I'll do other household repairs myself. I have administrative experience in healthcare so I can use Dr Google and sort the BS from the legit information, but I still get an annual checkup since that gives me access to tests I can't do at home.

I don't have a financial advisor because I have the know how to manage my own portfolio.

 

[Ordnael]

Doctors, electricians, gas installers, nurses, policemen: credentialed please

Plumbers: kinda of grey area, depends on the job, if you you're doing the plumbing for an apartment building you should de credentialed, if it's a one house or fixing gig I think as long as you have experience it's fine

Financiers, journalists, local level "computer says no" workers need no credentials, most are unethical and imoral to hold those jobs imho

 

[Garabaldi]

Credentials are basically a proxy for proof of work and reputation. Any time the responsible credential granting institution shows that it is using other means than proven competence to issue the credential makes the credential worthless and you have to evaluate the professional another way.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The best combinations are either experience plus credentials or credentials plus experience. The first is kinda like a reward. The second is putting one's learning to work in the real world.

 

[Arwon]

I think it's basically a good thing that people can't just moonlight as freelance gynecologists without being qualified

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

I think it's basically a good thing that people can't just moonlight as freelance gynecologists without being qualified

Credentials are important barrier in certain jobs where it's dangerous to have unqualified people.

Even then you should still judge by their job performance once there's enough data to know if they're competent.

 

[EvaDK]

Until someone figures out a better way to objectively establish the skillset, training and knowledge of someone working in a profession, I'll stick with what we have.

Also, Bill Gates didn't drop out of Harvard, because he disagreed with getting an education (with credentials); he dropped out because he had to choose between Harvard and setting up Microsoft with Paul Allen. He didn't feel he could do both at the same time, so he made a choice.

Steve Jobs on the other hand...

 

[PhroX]

When it comes to a job like a plumber or electrician, I don't need a university degree or such, but if I was employing one to do some work for me, I would want to be confident that they not just know how to do the pipes/cables etc., but also that they were properly knowledgeable of and trained in how to meet the relevant regulations and standards for such work. As and when I sell my property, I wouldn't want to be stuck with work that wasn't up to code. As such, I would require some degree of professional certification that shows they have at least undergone appropriate training.

 

[Hygro]

Steve Jobs on the other hand...

Stuck around to take classes, riddle me that anti-college people.

 

[Oruc]

I am legitimately open Oruc's free for all version of freedom, if it weren't for the loss of shareable efficiencies and that anti-credentials team is on the whole more wrong on every subject than the credentialed side they fight.

What's the alternative, Oruc? We tear it down, there is no more lies through titles. How do you go from there to something better than here, when there is worse than here? What is that process?

There is no process, this is just hostile manoeuvre by one tribe against another. Alot of people took on alot of debt and they've ended up serving coffee working in greggs, in 10 years you'll need a degree to stack shelves or clean a toilet.

police education in the us is basically learning how to use a firearm accurately and lethally. half a year of combat drills, not even tantamount to a military standard of deescalation (whose purpose it is to actually kill). that's it. it's why they shoot so often and are dangerous to people they don't understand. now you want them to shoot past their targets and hit all the grandmas why exactly?

I'm in England

 

[Hygro]

There is no process, this is just hostile manoeuvre by one tribe against another. Alot of people took on alot of debt and they've ended up serving coffee working in greggs, in 10 years you'll need a degree to stack shelves or clean a toilet.

And then everyone will be smarter?

Like do you fundamentally disagree with my premise, that in my field of economics the news-skeptical are underperforming the news in, lets call it "truthful discourse"? Do you disagree that the news is underperforming those who have attended classes in the discipline at a college level with enough stakes that they are forced to learn at least enough to pass the class rubric? Do you disagree that they themselves are worse at producing truthful discourse than those with doctorates etc who themselves are diverse in quality?

And do you disagree that it is similar in other fields? Medicine, biology, law?

And if you don't disagree, if you agree with my premise that the literal education in these fields correlates with an improved average ability to be correct in that field, what's your alternative to credentialing and defaulting to credentialed takes?

 

[Voidwalkin]

I think that economic policy is going to mirror the aggregate economic literacy of the public.

Some problems with credentials.

-we are a hierarchal class based society and education is valuable; consequently it will be walled off to those with lesser resources

-at higher levels you begin to encounter the problem that individual X is simply not smart enough to understand the material, and I think this would remain even if class barriers were removed. Some people are not as quick.

In either case, those that lack optomal understanding still contribute to political power and influence, and will get their way some of the time. Self-interested counter elites are bound to exploit the knowledge gap to political power, and this is particularly so because those on the lesser end will often feel they've been cheated(see conspiracy theories, feelings about bankers generally)

The solution is to reduce the political influence of the credentialed. I think this is most important. In business, it means allowing workers a greater voice, via either the labor union or a rethink of the ultimately rather feudal corporate structure. In politics it means removing class barriers. If the knowledge gap is certain, a trust gap cannot also be present or the credentialed simply will not lead, they will meet too much resistance.

...at present this means the credentialed will need to suffer a few reductions, willingly, in terms of social influence. The trust gap is already wide and grows wider.

 

[Hygro]

I appreciate that perspective and analysis, but I'm not sure how credentialism is anti union. It seems credentials and unions went hand in hand? The party of credentials is our pro union party so I'm little lost on the cause and effect here. But definitely on board with "more unions".

 

[Voidwalkin]

I don't think it is anti-union.

I guess in the most abstract of senses, credentialed academics provided the ideological basis for the right to mug unions in the 80's but its pretty tenuous.

I'm just looking to make the point that credentialed=more expertise and more expertise=legitimate leadership is complicated by social dynamics. A great many if not most have a personal incentive to minimize whatever consensus the credentialed will achieve, because prestige is useful and for one to shine another is relatively diminished.

Needs to be security and avenues for the less credentialed to shine or they will not likely accept leadership of the more credentialed, and may even openly dispute expertise.

 

[Hygro]

I agree. But also, is this not just an argument in addition for unions but for very high marginal tax rates and a compressed society?

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

Another problem is experts can and have been wrong.

Would you take investment advice from Jim Cramer? He has plenty of credentials. Harvard degree, Goldman Sachs alum. He's also been spectacularly wrong so many times that he became a meme.

Vioxx must be safe. Experts said so - the experts at Merck who developed it and the experts at the FDA who approved it for sale.

 

[Voidwalkin]

I agree. But also, is this not just an argument in addition for unions but for very high marginal tax rates and a compressed society?

That's policy arena stuff; the backlash against credentialism has more personal causes. I look at the issue a bit more holistically.

Let's say a position on the floor opens. It is equivalent to a sergeant. Worker A, 20 year vet, knowledgable and respected, applies, and so does B, 2 year vet, 4 year degree applies, and so does C, outside the company, master's degree, no experience whatsoever. HR usually goes with C or B, in my experience, while all those without credentials seethe. In many if not most fields, I would add, A is most often strongest by advantages of experience(some more forward thinking fields begin to recognize this, fortunately)

It's a social phenomenon. Our society is getting a little carried away with the credentialism, and it's having really weird effects. Tax the rich is cool, but kinda reeks of state adjustment of a playing field that remains rigged, rather than fairer play. Fairer play is what builds the trust and that can only be established societally. It's a cultural question, not a policy one.