I hope you aren't suggesting we just blindly follow the lead of the so-called "experts" just because they are certified. Some of the biggest idiots and failures I know are engineers and architects, who, frankly, probably couldn't figure out how a ball-point pen works.
You shouldn't blindly follow the lead of anyone, of course, no matter what credentials they have. But that's not my main point. The main point is that unless a person is educated to think critically, then they're really not able to accurately assess who might be right, and who is obviously full of BS. And that's the problem. In a society where the majority can't think for themselves, which sadly seems to be the case right now, you leave room for all sorts of charlatans to be taken seriously. Some of these charlatans end up being elected to public office, and dictating some of the agenda in public schools. IMO, schools should stick to teaching you how to think, and only give you the facts you need in order to do that ( that includes a good background in mathematics, science, and history ). They should leave the proselytizing to others. Instead, they skimp on the basics in order to make their target audience easier to brainwash with whatever agenda they choose ( and this has been done by both sides of the aisle ). Conservatives teaching creationism is as bad as liberals teaching about gay lifestyles. Neither have any value in teaching you to think critically, plus they waste valuable classroom time better spent on more concrete subjects.
I find some inconsistency with the logic though. Example: shouldn't we then think critically about what the elites tell us about global warming (or "climate change"), rather than blindly accept all the hype? I've long thought that much of the hooplah around it was manufactured or just plain mass panic. I've never entirely discounted it, but I certainly question whether it is caused by man, solar activity, natural cycles, or magical gnomes. We never have known enough about it to make that judgment because we haven't been keeping records that long. Evidence suggests that the earth has been far warmer in the past than it is right now (not just a few degrees), and also far colder. And now a bunch of elitists want to make me use lamps with mercury in them for the good of the world? I think I'd rather choose life.
I'll grant that the author's use of global warming is a bad example here. But nevertheless it illustrates the problem. Sure, there is still some room to debate the
cause of global warming. Is it totally manmade, or caused by increased solar output, or volcanies, or a combination of other causes? What really isn't up for debate is the fact that global warming exists. And yet those not educated in the methodology of the scientists who study global warming will come out with nonsensical reasons to say it isn't happening, such as snow on the ground in January. That's the problem-not only do many people these days totally misunderstand science, but even worse they feel somehow qualified to debate with those who have studied a subject for years, even decades. Why is this so? In my opinion the reason is because the education system failed. It not only failed to teach these people to think critically, but it also failed to teach them their limitations. An educated person knows their strengths and weaknesses. I won't go head-to-toe in a debate if I have only a cursory knowledge of a subject while the other person has a doctorate. Sorry, but I know I'm not qualified to debate this person. I can ask them how they arrived at their conclusions, and perhaps also ask how I may further study the subject. But to tell them they're wrong when I know little about what they studed is very presumptuous of me. This is why when I see people doing exactly that it annoys the heck out of me.
That brings me to my next point-trust. It's sorely lacking these days. In fact, the amount of skepticism I see on every subject is downright disgusting. We used to trust "experts" because we trusted that the system they went through to become experts weeded out the charlatans. Nowadays that trust is gone. We assume every scientist who says global warming is manmade has an ulterior motive. We assume everyone who tries to get us to use fluorescent lamps wants us to die of mercury poisoning ( don't even get me started on the hysteria the small amount of mercury in flourescents is causing-heck I used to play with BLOBS of the stuff as a kid, and I'm still here ). It just goes on and on and I'm sick of it. The end result is all we're doing is fighting each other and getting nowhere. At some point we have to trust that those who know more about a subject than we do might actually be right. This isn't to say these "experts" should never be questioned or put to the test. However, that's what peer review in many fields generally does. They are evaluated by others best qualified to judge the validity of what they say. The hard fact is a lot of science and engineering and medicine are inherently difficult subjects requiring years to master. There's no way anyone outside the field can meaningfully offer debate. Unfortunately, that's another fact which doesn't seem to be taught in schools these days.
And lastly, we need tolerance. Scientists are human, they will make mistakes. Or often they will discard old theories in favor of new ones as new data become available. This doesn't mean they're stupid or incompetent or being manipulated by someone to change their theories. It simply means that science is a fluid, evolving discipline which changes rapidly as we're able to gather better data. But sadly this fact is also lost on most of the general public.
).
