Expertise and Credibility

[Flavus Aquila]

How significant is the expertise of an author/presenter/teacher/etc. in terms of how easily you accept their conclusions?

If someone is not an expert, do you scrutinise his/her conclusions more intensely, or about the same as you would an experts work?

What do you do when expert and lay conclusions about something very important to you are contradictory?

(Not a questionnaire thread, just some guide questions. Cut n paste n answer questions if you wish).

 

[Deleted member 10171]

How significant is the expertise of an author/presenter/teacher/etc. in terms of how easily you accept their conclusions?

I respect (and to some extent even admire) individuals who are experts in their chosen field but I will never ever hesitate to question their conclusions - regardless of how much I may like or trust them.

If someone is not an expert, do you scrutinise his/her conclusions more intensely, or about the same as you would an experts work?

I don't think I differentiate (on some levels) - I always scrutinise, question and weigh up what is being communicated and then I make my own assessment.

What do you do when expert and lay conclusions about something very important to you are contradictory?

See above response - I address the contradiction to both the expert and lay person and then see who is able to provide me with the best response. I will then weigh it all up and then make a decision.

 

[charlatan]

I think there's 2 factors: expertise + how speculative the field is.
Yes, ultimately it's best if you can check the conclusions yourself, but this question is most interesting if we suppose we don't have the time and need to decide what to believe.

In that case, I say things like theoretical(non-experimentally tested) physics, philosophy, politics, economics are harder to achieve certain knowledge about in relation to reality (as opposed to purely axiomatic theories)....than say, time-tested experimental physics.

Witten may be a genius, but I am more likely to doubt the view that string theory is true than I am to doubt various tested claims about the standard model. Yes, Witten probably would accept that we don't know if it is true, so this isn't a perfect example, but still.

I also don't think that the only worthy knowledge is tested knowledge, e.g. philosophy frequently exits those realms but remains pretty much impossible to do without to some extent, as we have to start somewhere. But I think tested knowledge attains one of the closest analogues of certainty to knowledge that is based on consistency.

 

[Sinny]

I don't go by "expertise", I go by competency.

After all, mainstream "experts" are often drones, serving uncle Sam.

I'm the judge of the competency, unless I'm knowingly unknowing.