Expert vs Experts: Who Do We Trust and Why?
A doctor tells you there is a treatment for your illness. A car mechanic says the damage is only cosmetic. A pilot says the turbulence will pass. A qualified scientist states that the environment is collapsing. An economist says that your financial troubles will be over soon.
Of these statements by experts, why are some taken as opinions? Why do people accept the doctor’s statement but not the scientist’s? Why do people accept the car mechanic’s verdict but not the economist’s?
An expert is defined as:
Having, involving, or displaying special skill or knowledge derived from training or experience.
– Merriam Webster
The definition has criteria – “from training or experience” [emphasis mine]. Training is self-explanatory you cannot be a doctor unless you pass certain exams. You cannot be a car mechanic without training and certifications. So that part of the definition is solid. Experience – here is the crux of the issue, what Person A defines as experience can be different to what Person B defines it as. A regulation might state that an “Experienced Person” has had 5 years’ experience, and another might state it as someone who has achieved any qualifications from a specific list. Experience is the main issue in this ‘Expert vs Experts?’ debate. There are more non-doctors than there are doctors; do the 500 comments on an article backed by a quick Google search outweigh that of the doctor whose studied this topic for decades? What is the exchange ratio, 5 google searches to 1 years’ experience?
There are other nuances too. Do we trust a doctor’s credentials more than the ones possessed by a scientist? It has become a concerning trend that “my anecdote beats your expertise.” People in power sometimes popularise this view as well. “Britain has had enough of experts,” said Michael Gove when he was Justice Secretary. Of course, this is not limited to the UK either. One of my personal favourite examples was when US politicians brought snowballs into their governmental seats to prove that global warming was a myth. This type of ‘expertise’ is most prevalent in the media whenever one isolated event contradicts the wider evidence.
Have we had enough of experts or do we just not like what they say? It is no crime to want to be surrounded by opinions that are more to your taste, because it makes your life happier, safer, and more fun. We can hide from opinions, but we should not disregard their origins. Echo-chambers and being surrounded by yes-men are not good ways to learn and have been proven to often be detrimental to development. While we can hide from opinions we cannot hide from facts; just because someone doesn’t like that the world is heating up doesn’t suddenly stop the world from heating up. So, we turn to changing those facts into opinions by discrediting both the fact and the author(s).
This is not limited to environmental issues. Anytime concerning issues push past the noise and enter the mainstream news cycle, misinformation occurs: the cost-of-living crisis, the covid vaccine, and climate change. Next time there is a large debate about a prevalent topic, look through the replies or the ‘hot takes’ available. You will see how they follow a general template of the following:
“There is no [insert crisis of the moment], my [source?] says [a statement either passing responsibility or an outlandish conspiracy theory]”
We’ve all seen the news – a loose term sometimes – articles about the cost of living.
“I fed my family of [large number] for [low cost] a week. Here is how.”
You read it and the techniques make some sense – reduced item sections – wholesale value items – Tupperware for leftovers. However right at the end there is the disappointing sentence: “The family lives with [adult]s’ parents who cover other family expenses.”
These opinion pieces have helpful elements, but often they detract from the actual suffering these crises inflict. Telling a family how to save money when they are already living on the edge between heating their homes and feeding their families reduces their crisis to an argument about methodologies. It is disingenuous to all those suffering. The same arguments are rolled out in a strikingly similar format to parrot the same position on a different topic. The position? The anti-expert.
Of course, different topics have different levels of response. The cost of living produced less vitriolic material than statements about the covid-19 vaccines. Why could that be? Covid was, and – despite best efforts to the contrary – is still dangerous. It’s a movie scenario come to life. It’s a worldwide bogeyman that crept into your life. It is scary. Does the fear factor of this pandemic correlate to a change in the exchange ratio? Perhaps, but regardless this highlighted the power of modern media agencies and social media to perpetuate whichever ‘facts’ or ‘opinions’ were trending at that time.
The ‘Expert vs Experts?’ debate is not all doom and gloom. In fact, people’s inverse opinions on important topics are paramount for successful societal development. We must continually inform those in power about our fears and our attitudes and ask them to assess the experts around them, despite having experience and the relevancy of their qualifications. It would be naïve to think that a qualified and experienced expert could not be wrong. It is the way the assessment of their experience is conducted that is key.
By following modern media’s current trajectory, fake news runs rampant and the useful elements that it provides often get lost and written off by authoritative figures. Opinion articles like this, shared on social media, news websites and forums, are great facilitators for useful change but must be used carefully and to prevent the spread of harmful lines of thought. Only those that view opinion pieces are affected by them so the pieces should not be relied upon to fulfil the job of change.
There are more direct ways to help facilitate change, and that is to make known your views to your elected officials.
Written by Tom Roxburgh
I'm Tom,
I am a recent graduate who is currently working in the sustainability sector.
Whilst doing my degree, I found a passion for sustainability which has now moved from solely green energy and renewables toward challenging societal issues.
I'm a massive fantasy and sci-fi fan, enjoying all their forms of media. When I'm not working, I am usually painting or writing. I live in London where you can either find me either out and about or playing video games there is no in-between.
