The problem with thinking you know more than the experts

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 48Fire I was fortunate to teach some leadership classes. One of the best simulations was on the value and recognition of experts. Some of the non-experts, but heavy on blowhard skills, would absolutely run over the experts on their team. And their listening ability was nearly zero [emoji23][emoji23]

I watched that play out in person hundreds of times at Megacorp. I was undoubtedly the blowhard some of the time, at least when I was young and full of ambition.

[unclemick]

My favorite in working days was when a room full of engineers would agree and then we would spent the allotted meeting time arguing who was 'righter'. Grin

heh heh heh - media 'must' fill it's time slot.

[rk911]

Quote:

Originally Posted by brewer12345 I'd guess this is closely related to the widespread dissatisfaction and distrust with the mainstream media. The media likes to portray themselves as experts and quote experts, so I am sure the latter are tarred with the same brush.

the main problem with virtually most media? lack of curiosity and the inability to compose an actual question.

[besa]

If I only had a super computer. Oh wait, I do.

The www saved my life and allowed me to get well on my way to financial independence. My financial advisor was going to ruin me. Totally ruin me.

The www helps me all day and night.

It is the 8th wonder of the world.

I will take the bad with the good.

Thanks.

[Koolau]

If we define "expert" as someone who has actually studied and w*rked (in this case) in the virology field, I guess I haven't seen any yet (I could have missed it.) Rather, it seems we've picked physicians as our experts. They have an expertise certainly, but it may not be in the field we need to get through the current situation in the smoothest fashion. JMHO, of course.

If we base "expertise" on their 3-month track record, I STILL have not seen an expert ANYPLACE on TV. As always, YMMV.

[38Chevy454]

Quote:

Originally Posted by besa If I only had a super computer. Oh wait, I do. The www saved my life and allowed me to get well on my way to financial independence. My financial advisor was going to ruin me. Totally ruin me. The www helps me all day and night. It is the 8th wonder of the world. I will take the bad with the good. Thanks.

...and here I thought compounding (financial math type) was the 8th wonder of the world

[Badger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolau If we define "expert" as someone who has actually studied and w*rked (in this case) in the virology field, I guess I haven't seen any yet (I could have missed it.) Rather, it seems we've picked physicians as our experts. They have an expertise certainly, but it may not be in the field we need to get through the current situation in the smoothest fashion. JMHO, of course. If we base "expertise" on their 3-month track record, I STILL have not seen an expert ANYPLACE on TV. As always, YMMV.

+1

I would always joke when called into the field to anywhere in the country to solve problems as the Senior Microbiologist/Chemical Engineer that an expert was someone who lived at least 50 miles away.


Anytime I see a reference to "the experts say..." I am very skeptical about what is said unless the expert is identified as well as the printed source of the study. Too many "50 mile experts" being used a credible source.



I am also skeptical of medical doctors who are quoted in the news when I don't know who they are and what their area of expertise is. For all I know they are a GP, or proctologist, or neurologist, or obstetrician or and not someone with a background in Virology or at least Microbiology.


There has also been an explosion of opinions based on nothing but uneducated conjecture by uneducated/unqualified people with no background in disease that are offered as factual.


Cheers!

[Joggernot]

I don't remember a lockdown for Hong Kong Flu. We even held Woodstock during the pandemic!

[lsimpson33]

1) A lot of people view higher education (where a lot of our experts come from in the US) as a liberal conspiracy and liberal bastion. By politicizing experts, they encourage the “other side” to dismiss them. A typical us vs. them strategy. I find this hilarious, as I’ve worked in higher ed for over 15 years and found a lot more conservatism than I thought. In fact, the last university I worked at was heavily libertarian-leaning. With that said, the data shows that people with graduate degrees tend to lean liberal (except some notable degree exceptions such as law). So I think a lot of people think that higher ed turns people liberal. Maybe so, but it could also be self-selection or a variety of other confounds affecting the outcome. It’s a question or correlation vs. causation.

2) Relatedly, most people lack solid understanding of the scientific process and thus distrust it. The quasi-media (meaning those that don’t engage in thorough fact-checking and independent validation) definitely plays a role here (see: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/05/28/410313446/why-a-journalist-scammed-the-media-into-spreading-bad-chocolate-science). But overall it’s a lack of understanding of the process. People will say things to me like, “One study shows coffee is bad and another shows it’s good, so we can’t trust the experts.” Actually that doesn’t mean you can’t trust them; it just means that they are working something out. You can only play with a handful of variables at a time. Study 1 showed coffee was good. But then a different scientist looks at study 1 and says, “Yes but is that true for people from different ethnic groups?” And then they run a study and find it isn’t. But then another scientist looks at study 2 and says “Maybe it’s not the ethnicity, but it’s the diet of those ethnic groups holistically that matters.” And so forth. People think science is conclusions where they should really think about it as narrowing-down to a better answer.

[Nemo2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Badger ......an expert was someone who lived at least 50 miles away.

That's why I only trust 16 year old high school dropouts from Sweden.

[Markola]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuirWannabe And we really are a bunch of ultracrepidarians, especially with the web at fingers reach.

I read the entire string and choose MuirWannabe as my winner. I vote we change the name of the “ER Forum” to “Ultracrepidarians R US. org”

[Nemo2]

Are Ultracrepidarians and Ultracrapidarians synonymous?

[Lcountz]

Two words:

Howard Beale.

If you know who he is, you know WHY.

If you don't, look him up...where else?

On You Tube.

[indiajust]

i remember global cooling, eggs are bad for you, wooden cutting surfaces will kill you, ... experts frequently wrong and powerfully herd motivated, gubmint influenced or outright controlled.

I'll make my own decisions.

[Just_Steve]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemo2 That's why I only trust 16 year old high school dropouts from Sweden.

How dare you.

[Koolau]

Quote:

Originally Posted by indiajust i remember global cooling, eggs are bad for you, wooden cutting surfaces will kill you, ... experts frequently wrong and powerfully herd motivated, gubmint influenced or outright controlled. I'll make my own decisions.

I recall when the "experts" in finance (you know, the E. Jones of the world) said I was making a mistake for no longer using their services. I pointed out that when I lost money (from their advice) it was still my problem, so why not take full responsibility not only for the results but for the decisions (oh, and save the fees!) They were not pleased.

I'm sure the Covid experts have lots of expertise that I don't have. Having said that, they won't be responsible for me if they are wrong. Why not eliminate the middle man. I'm reasonably intelligent AND educated. I'll take their expert advice into account and then do what I think is best for me. As always, YMMV.

[jollystomper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemo2 That's why I only trust 16 year old high school dropouts from Sweden.

Oh, SNAP!

[jollystomper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolau I recall when the "experts" in finance (you know, the E. Jones of the world) said I was making a mistake for no longer using their services. I pointed out that when I lost money (from their advice) it was still my problem, so why not take full responsibility not only for the results but for the decisions (oh, and save the fees!) They were not pleased. I'm sure the Covid experts have lots of expertise that I don't have. Having said that, they won't be responsible for me if they are wrong. Why not eliminate the middle man. I'm reasonably intelligent AND educated. I'll take their expert advice into account and then do what I think is best for me. As always, YMMV.

The first paragraph reminds me of what I do when I receive offers to manage my finances from those who promise they can beat the market averages. I tell them Are you willing to do the following: if what you manage for me beats the market, I will let you keep whatever gain over the market you generate for me. But if you do not beat the market averages, you pay me the amount you lost me below the market average". Never had a taker.

The second paragraph brings up one of the concerns I believe people have with "experts" - the perceived lack of accountability if they are wrong. Perhaps that is because when the experts are wrong, you rarely hear them just say they were wrong, apologize, and discuss what is needed to make amends for their mistake - it becomes more along the lines of "we were only wrong because we did not have the proper data at the time". Few perceive of any repercussions happening to them.

While I would not completely ignore the experts, I do take things with a grain of salt for three reasons:

1) Becoming an expert in a field does not require 100% perfection. As my brother, a doctor, put it, "even those with the lowest passing grades in Medical School and Medical Boards still qualify to be doctors". My relatives in law enforcement has said similar things.

2) There is a difference between what I call "book knowledge" and what I call "hands-on knowledge". From my time as a "subject matter expert" in various disciplines during my time at Megacorp, I saw people being touted as experts who had only read the documentation or, worse, created a presentation. When it came to actual "hands-on" experience they had none, or had so little so long ago that it was no longer relevant. When I myself was called to give presentations at conferences, I was only comfortable with giving presentations on matters that I, or someone that I trusted, had direct, hands on experience with - and was always willing to share the good, bad and ugly of the experience.

3) I have learned that "politics" is in everything, including science. Who gets appointed to scientific/technical positions of expertise and leadership is not devoid of political dealings and pressures. The greatest example I have seem of this during this epidemic is the treatment of Taiwan. They have expertise if dealing with past epidemics, and they took actions early that many could have learned from and kept they infection/death rate very low. But even though the have the technical and scientific knowledge, they are not allowed to work with the World Health Organization, and when the WHO is questioned about that they ignore or refuse to answer the questions.

Even with taking a grain of salt, the question for me still remains "to what degree am I willing to take personal responsibility if I am wrong?" You can see many areas where individuals believe they are "experts" in order to, in their mind, exercise their liberty: speed limits, what and the quantity of things they choose to eat or drink, how they act when they believe a law to be "unfair", etc. But when there actions are proven wrong, human nature has to fight against the "its not my fault" desire and find someone to blame. I manage my own money, and though I am down along with almost everyone else this year, I know I have only myself to blame, and I am fine with that. When it comes to potential life and death issues, I have to be willing to take that same view.

[martyp]

I think the problem with both experts and laypersons is knowing what you don’t know.

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rk911 the main problem with virtually most media? lack of curiosity and the inability to compose an actual question.

Along with (reporters) statements poorly disguised as questions. Happens all the time, the “question” goes on long after the ask, or the question is framed in an attempt force the desired answer. Some questions are just plain stupid, how do you feel, do you have any regrets now that we’ve passed XX deaths? WTH!