This topic occurred to me a week ago, when Randman put the term EXPERTS in quote marks to suggest that the experts were to be questioned. Or at least not to be taken at face value.
Now I do not know Randman's specific field of study or expertise, but on reading through the thread the current topic was not one of them.
Now that is just a by-and-by, the reason for my suggesting this as a topic is to ask why are experts questioned to the extent they are. This is not to question genuine academic scepiticism amongst fellow experts, but to ask why do people with no genuine knowledge in the field question their conclusions?
My field of knowledge (albeit 10 years old now) is economics and business practice, and I can have arguements/discussions with people who have studied to Phd level, and I will respect their opinions in the same way that they do mine (here's hoping!). But if someone who's economic knowledge is based on the price of a tin of beans starts to mock and deride, well you can understand why I would disregard their opinion.
The question I am asking is this, what justification do you have for questioning/ignoring the opinion of people with a far greater knowledge of a subject than you do? And why?
™ Version 4.2