> 6. Most people who have never studied physics would be unlikely to > pontificate on the subject. Most people who have never studied economics > not only will pontificate on the subject, but will explain to you in > terms that suggest you are an idiot, why they are right and you are > wrong. That they are unqualified will never occur to them.
Requiring qualifications to express an opinion is demanding the acceptance of argument from authority, a poor place to situate foundations. One hopes a qualified opinion will express good arguments but often depresingly doesn't because qualifications are often won by assumming appropriate, authority accepted, permissions the echoing of which can win reward. Besides which it is an error to claim someone who doesn't study at certified tertiary school is unqualified to opine of things they've experienced their entire life. Furthermore qualified does not equate with competent, honest and/or unbiased. I'm perfectly happy to read, hear and judge the opinion of the wholly unqualified and it turns out that this neat medium of the Internet allows us ample opotunity to press for detail and explore the competence of the opinion giver. Screw argument from authority. Me: Can I assume then that the next time you have a funny pain in your chest you won't be looking for someone with an MD degree to talk it over with? I completely agree that a qualification is no guarantee that you will get a correct answer. And it is statistically possible that someone totally ignorant *could* come up with the right answer to any given question. But for my part, I want ot know something about the person who is talking to me and why I ought to trust anything they say. So, if the question under discussion is about Physics, I am quite likely to give a lot of credence to what Dan says, since I know he has actually studied the topic, certainly more so than I have (2 semesters of college physics is somewhat less than a PhD, all other things being equal). And I hope Dan will give me the same respect on areasa that I have some authority on. In this case, my doctoral dissertation topic was on the structural problems that led to the S&L failures. Interestingly, when I first proposed this topic, my biggest hurdle was convincing a committee of professors at the University of Michigan that there was anything there worth researching. they all had the idea that the reforms of the 1930s had settled all of the banking problems. I had to write a preliminary paper demonstrating that those reforms were not doing the job people thought before they would approve my topic. So, bottom line, if the topic is financial meltdowns, I do in fact know more than you do about that topic. Get over it. Regards, _______________________________________________ -- Kevin B. O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." - Dwight D. Eisenhower _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
