{"id":8676,"date":"2017-05-12T05:23:01","date_gmt":"2017-05-12T10:23:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hilbertthm90.wordpress.com\/?p=8676"},"modified":"2022-06-21T12:27:04","modified_gmt":"2022-06-21T17:27:04","slug":"what-is-an-expert","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/amindformadness.com\/2017\/05\/what-is-an-expert\/","title":{"rendered":"What is an Expert?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

I’ll tread carefully here because we live in a strange time of questioning the motives and knowledge of expert opinion to bolster every bizarre conspiracy theory under the sun. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

No one trusts any information anymore. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s not even clear if trusting\/doubting expert opinion is anti\/hyper-intellectual. But that isn’t the subject of today’s topic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Expertise Without Credentials<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

I listen to quite a few podcasts, and several of them have made me think about expertise recently.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, Gary Taubes<\/a> was on the Sam Harris podcast and both of them often get tarred with the “you don’t have a Ph.D. in whatever, so you’re an unknowledgeable\/dangerous quack” brush. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Also, Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History<\/em> podcast is insanely detailed, but every ten minutes he reminds the audience “I’m not a historian …”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many people who value the importance of expertise think that the degree (the Ph.D. in particular but maybe an MFA for arts stuff) is the be-all-end-all of the discussion. You have the Ph.D., then you’re an expert. If you don’t, then you’re not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The argument I want to present is that if you believe this, you really should be willing to extend your definition of expertise to a wider group of people who have essentially done the equivalent work of one of these degrees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is a University Degree?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Think of it this way. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Person A goes to Subpar University, scrapes by with the minimal work, kind of hates it, and then teaches remedial classes at a Community College for a few years. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Person B has a burning passion for the subject, studies all of the relevant literature, and continues to write about and develop novel ideas in the subject for decades. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’d be way more willing to trust Person B as an expert than Person A despite the degree differences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maybe I’ve already convinced you, and I need not go any further. Many of you are probably thinking, yeah, but there are parts to doing a degree that can’t be mimicked without the schooling. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

And others might be thinking, yeah, but Person B is merely theoretical. No one in the real world exists like Person B. We’ll address each of these points separately.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Ph.D.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\"expert<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

I think of a Ph.D. as having three parts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Phase 1 <\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Demonstration of competence of the basics. This is often called the Qualifying or Preliminary Exam. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many students don’t fully understand the purpose of this phase while going through it. They think they must memorize and compute. They think of it as a test of basic knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At least in math and the hard sciences, this is not the case. It is almost a test of attitude. <\/p>\n\n\n\n