Do you suppose that anyone else sees you as I see you, any one else alive or dead? We all of us meet one another uniquely and that meeting is only a shadow of the only real meeting we have — our meeting with ourselves
Hugh Walpole - John Cornelius (1937)
You are unique, I am unique, today is unique, tomorrow will be unique. Whatever we try to do about it and however we try to mitigate or ignore its effects, uniqueness weaves complexity into our daily lives. We get over it in numerous ways from generalisations to stereotypes, from slogans to doctrines, principles, beliefs, ideologies and many more useful subterfuges.
Or we listen to experts who offer us their generalisations. Yet in a sense, experts become a generalisation when presented to us as its human face. Especially when selected by governments, media or a whole range of interested parties including interested individuals. Experts say, climate scientist overwhelmingly agree, experts predict, an expert study has shown, this guy has made a video.
In the public arena there is often no easy escape from situations where experts are selected by those who are not experts. Experts are unique individuals, their expertise was uniquely acquired, their expert views are unique, their careers individually unique and so are their ambitions, personalities and indeed their politics.
As we know, when we are offered experts as the human face of a political generalisation, we should check both. We should check the experts and the basis of their generalisations. As we also know, many people don’t bother checking. Yet experts are unique, fallible individuals and that’s a generalisation worth hanging on too.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? also applies to experts.
6 comments:
And at no point did we think of the charlatan Ferguson or the inepts who comprise sage. Honest . . .
That Attenborough bloke, though. Clearly an expert on climate change because he got a degree in an unrelated subject in 1948, and has made some great programmes. And Greta. How can someone so impassioned not be an expert?
Put simply there are too many experts chasing too few rewarding positions. There will experts who fan controversy just because it gets their name in the media, and a range of opinions for the media to pick over for their particular audience. Unfortunately the expertise is often sacrificed for brownie points. What is worse some 'experts' are selected merely because they are visually attractive or good communicators.
I suspect that there is not a lot we can do to make sure 'proper' experts are chosen... but we can investigate their backgrounds and previous publications to expose the worst cases. Who knows? Perhaps 'reputation' will become fashionable again?
Agreed. Also what Sam Vega says.
Having spent most of my working life around academics I conclude that outside their particular speciality they are no better than you or I; no wiser, not really more intelligent, just people who liked school so much they never left.
Jannie - that's right, he didn't enter my mind at all hem hem.
Sam - and that Attenborough bloke has flown all over the world so he must know all about atmospheric physics. Greta will have picked it up instead of the school lessons she didn't attend.
DJ - it is possible, 'reputation' could become fashionable again. A suspicion that we are not well informed could already be lurking beneath the surface after the coronavirus game.
Mark - yet the obviously dishonest nature of it never seems to matter.
djc - in my younger days I sometimes wondered about the attractions of academia, but contacts with academics in my field were not really encouraging.
Post a Comment