7 Comments

Sorry, but this article misses the point entirely and this miss largely stems from the notion that scientists or experts are a monolithic group. First understand that obtaining a Ph.D. in the physical sciences in America (the minimum to be considered a scientific expert) is likely the most difficult degree to obtain. It requires a person who is very much above average intelligence, who is a self starter, who is a Type A personality, and who is a problem solver. Now understand how to maintain a job in academia without tenure requires a scientist to be fund for their research. If they lose funding, then they lose their job. Lastly, understand that of all those grants deemed "meritable" typically fewer than one in six is actually funded. This creates a population of extremely intelligent, highly motivated problem solvers who are all looking for an edge. This also leads to the politization of science.

Now a problem comes along and an expert is required. First of all, you are going to get all kinds of "experts" who will make claims spanning everything from it is nothing to it is a catastrophe. Many of these people will be principled, but many others will be looking for an edge. The politicians who are looking for their policy to be implemented will automatically choose those who state the opinion that they desire. The politicians and the media will then start a campaign to deign these scientists as leading experts when they often are not. The bottom line is that it is not the experts who are wrong, rather it is the politician who chooses their expert to state their desired opinion who is wrong.

Expand full comment

An expert is a two syllable word, Ex and pert. Ex is former and pert is cocky. An expert is a formerly cocky person

Expand full comment

"Instead, an individual or entity is conferred the position of Expert by an institution so long as the individual or entity is willing to further the interests of that institution." In a way, this describes my experience as a parent with a kid who did fit neatly into a public elementary school setting. I had a teacher, a special ed paraprofessional, and a school psychologist bent on classifying my kid as autistic and giving him special ed support. I told them: "he's not autistic. He's just smart and weird." But they continued applying pressure and I gave him and sent him to a shrink. Turns out he wasn't autistic -- just smart and weird, and looking for his tribe of other smart weirdos. He still teases me about all the testing I allowed him to be put through. "Expertise" can become a self-feeding machine; the more special ed staff a school hires, the more kids seem to get pulled into the special ed system.

Expand full comment

Yeah, "the institutions" in America are sort of eating their seed corn right now. As you say, when the system is working right, they're a property role for credentialed expertise. I'm not going to sit and here and say that the legitimacy of the "credentialers" is completely gone, there's still legitimate science happening, governments still producing objective facts, but it's eroding very quickly. Certainly, STEM is probably where it remains strongest, but the law for example is one or two SCOTUS seats away from being completely lost.

Expand full comment