2017-10-31, 02:18 PM
Seems nonsensical to posit a binary relationship between layperson and expert. A continuum that would appear quite blurry in the middle seems more appropriate. Another interesting aspect of Linda's OP.
(2017-10-31, 02:18 PM)Silence Wrote: [ -> ]Seems nonsensical to posit a binary relationship between layperson and expert. A continuum that would appear quite blurry in the middle seems more appropriate. Another interesting aspect of Linda's OP.
(2017-10-31, 12:03 PM)Obiwan Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting article. I’m not sure Pellegrini isn’t an expert even though he isn’t a professional physicist. If I read the article correctly it looks like he has spent many years thinking about the subject. A person can be an expert in some subjects without formal qualifications don’t you think? Did I miss something?
He certainly not a professional physicist as I read it but I am not sure that makes him a lay person either in practical terms (although I guess technically it does).
(2017-10-31, 03:48 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]That's an interesting example. What do you make of his reception by experts, which seems to be a thoughtful consideration of his idea? And what do you think it would mean if in the end, consensus ends up finding against his point?
Linda
(2017-10-31, 04:01 PM)Obiwan Wrote: [ -> ]I guess experts (paid and unpaid) are a cross-section of society. Some will be open-minded truth seeking folk, some will be convinced they know the answer already and therefore he is wrong. The best response in opposition is perhaps to show how the assertion is wrong, if that’s possible. I think his reception is what I would expect from honest open-minded people who are willing to learn or who are aware of the limitations of their own knowledge (interestingly perhaps, it seems to me that those who are real experts are often very aware of the limitations of their knowledge, happy to teach and learn, and don’t hide behind bluster).
If in the end the consensus is against him, then provided his ideas have been properly considered and there is a reasoned rebuttal of them produced, it probably indicates that he’s wrong. Probably .
Quote:Obiwan
I was more commenting on the definition of an expert rather than debate about lay people proving experts wrong. That it can be difficult to distinguish between the two.
(2017-10-31, 11:05 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]In what way is it difficult to distinguish between the two? I understand that people can have varying degrees of knowledge and experience, or varying levels of engagement in a field. But usually you can find some indication of the minimum requirements needed to make someone competent - for example, the GCW description of the requirements to be regarded as a master weaver (http://www.thegcw.org/mrws/filedriver/Gu...eb2016.pdf) or the board exams for medical specialties.
And it's not like we are usually looking at people who are close, in terms of knowledge and experience, but rather who are far apart.
Would you expect, that if you present a research study to two people with equivalent expertise, that they would generally agree on what valid conclusions could be drawn from that study?
Linda
(2017-10-31, 11:55 PM)Obiwan Wrote: [ -> ]As an example, an amateur astronomer might know as much as someone with a PhD in the subject but have no formal qualifications. They might both be experts. Absence of formal certification of competence doesn't imply a lack of it does it?Sorry. No problem
If you mean the difference between someone who is a professional/amateur expert in the subject and someone who is not, that's probably easier to identify - if you know the subject area.
I don't mean to be rude but I did say I was merely commenting on Chris's remark originally so don't take offence if I don't continue in this discussion - I am not really interested.