Our world is continuously getting more and more complicated, and our world's highly politicized issues are no exception. Here in CFC OT and elsewhere, we passionately debate things like global warming, the theory of evolution, and economic policies --- highly nuanced and complicated subjects. Gone are the days when the Bastille was stormed simply because there wasn't enough bread. Now the things that rile us up require a Ph.D. to fully understand.
Naturally, when these things are discussed, expertise is given just as much attention as (or much more than) the facts themselves. I, for example, accept the theory of evolution as a solid theory mostly for the simple reason that every biologist from somewhere other than Bob Jones University uses it all the time in his research. Of course, I'm not completely ignorant of the theory itself (I've taken high school biology, after all), but I hardly know enough to be rationally confident in my opinions in a vacuum. I have better things to do with my time than independently verify everything a scientist ever says, so once it's widely published in peer-reviewed journals, I'll mostly take it for granted. Eventually, when I'm an adult, I myself may be an expert researcher in something, and I'd expect others to view me in the same light --- this increasing specialization is what drives economic growth and ease of life, after all.
Other people may decide to not subscribe to the theory; these people proceed to convince themselves that there is a grand conspiracy or mass stupidity, and then they pat themselves on the back for being so independently minded --- usually, of course, ignoring the fact that the number of books they've read on the topic might not even qualify for free shipping on amazon.com. (I myself am skeptical of certain scientific experts --- I think the rush in recent years to medicate every child in America was horribly conceived, for example, and luckily it's dying down.)
So do each of you guys view "the experts"? How do you balance healthy skepticism with a need to fulfill your own specialty while they fulfill theirs? How much do you need to study a subject yourself before you feel confident enough to challenge the experts a bit? Do you think too much, too little, or just enough emphasis on expertise is placed on the aforementioned politicized issues?
Naturally, when these things are discussed, expertise is given just as much attention as (or much more than) the facts themselves. I, for example, accept the theory of evolution as a solid theory mostly for the simple reason that every biologist from somewhere other than Bob Jones University uses it all the time in his research. Of course, I'm not completely ignorant of the theory itself (I've taken high school biology, after all), but I hardly know enough to be rationally confident in my opinions in a vacuum. I have better things to do with my time than independently verify everything a scientist ever says, so once it's widely published in peer-reviewed journals, I'll mostly take it for granted. Eventually, when I'm an adult, I myself may be an expert researcher in something, and I'd expect others to view me in the same light --- this increasing specialization is what drives economic growth and ease of life, after all.
Other people may decide to not subscribe to the theory; these people proceed to convince themselves that there is a grand conspiracy or mass stupidity, and then they pat themselves on the back for being so independently minded --- usually, of course, ignoring the fact that the number of books they've read on the topic might not even qualify for free shipping on amazon.com. (I myself am skeptical of certain scientific experts --- I think the rush in recent years to medicate every child in America was horribly conceived, for example, and luckily it's dying down.)
So do each of you guys view "the experts"? How do you balance healthy skepticism with a need to fulfill your own specialty while they fulfill theirs? How much do you need to study a subject yourself before you feel confident enough to challenge the experts a bit? Do you think too much, too little, or just enough emphasis on expertise is placed on the aforementioned politicized issues?
