Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Reacting to "Experts"
[email protected]
In a message dated 12/30/2003 7:58:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
unschoolingdad@... writes:
did only state the negative about experts and degrees and credentials, as did
Sandra imo, and above you do it again. Not meaning to argue, just reading
what you are writing while also noticing what you are *not* writing.
Maybe this is one of those things you find has to be overstated to be
heard through hser expert awe? My experience has been more the opposite --
hsers (and parents generally) tending to dismiss ideas and to trash experts and
anyone formally educated or credentialed just because they *are*, without
listening or thinking. JJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
unschoolingdad@... writes:
> ~~ Nope, nor do I defend the idea of blindly DIStrusting people basedWell, I'm all for thinking parents instead of unthinking ones! But you
> on
> the sole piece of information that they went to college or are considered an
>
> "expert."~~
>
> The distrust comes from a theory or method that some people think is
> idiotic. The point was that just because a person is called an "expert" doesn't
> mean they should be listened to, regardless of their credentials. The title,
> "expert", carries a lot more weight than might be warranted with some people.
>
> If I don't agree with an "expert's" opinion, after THINKING about it, all
> the degrees and certificates in the world won't make a difference.
>
> Lyle
>
did only state the negative about experts and degrees and credentials, as did
Sandra imo, and above you do it again. Not meaning to argue, just reading
what you are writing while also noticing what you are *not* writing.
Maybe this is one of those things you find has to be overstated to be
heard through hser expert awe? My experience has been more the opposite --
hsers (and parents generally) tending to dismiss ideas and to trash experts and
anyone formally educated or credentialed just because they *are*, without
listening or thinking. JJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lyle W.
In a message dated 12/30/2003 7:58:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
unschoolingdad@... writes:
Sandra imo, and above you do it again. Not meaning to argue, just reading
what you are writing while also noticing what you are *not* writing.
Maybe this is one of those things you find has to be overstated to be
heard through hser expert awe? My experience has been more the opposite --
hsers (and parents generally) tending to dismiss ideas and to trash experts and
anyone formally educated or credentialed just because they *are*, without
listening or thinking. JJ<<<<<
Jeez, the whole thing started as sort of a joke. It was supposed to be lighthearted, but obviously I worded it a little heavier than I thought. I think a lot of the main stream "experts" are quacks, but they sell a lot of books and get on TV so someone must be listening. I'm just not one of them.
Lyle
***Always remember, Lead By Example***
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
unschoolingdad@... writes:
> ~~ Nope, nor do I defend the idea of blindly DIStrusting people baseddid only state the negative about experts and degrees and credentials, as did
> on
> the sole piece of information that they went to college or are considered an
>
> "expert."~~
>
> The distrust comes from a theory or method that some people think is
> idiotic. The point was that just because a person is called an "expert" doesn't
> mean they should be listened to, regardless of their credentials. The title,
> "expert", carries a lot more weight than might be warranted with some people.
>
> If I don't agree with an "expert's" opinion, after THINKING about it, all
> the degrees and certificates in the world won't make a difference.
>
> Lyle
>
>>>>Well, I'm all for thinking parents instead of unthinking ones! But you
Sandra imo, and above you do it again. Not meaning to argue, just reading
what you are writing while also noticing what you are *not* writing.
Maybe this is one of those things you find has to be overstated to be
heard through hser expert awe? My experience has been more the opposite --
hsers (and parents generally) tending to dismiss ideas and to trash experts and
anyone formally educated or credentialed just because they *are*, without
listening or thinking. JJ<<<<<
Jeez, the whole thing started as sort of a joke. It was supposed to be lighthearted, but obviously I worded it a little heavier than I thought. I think a lot of the main stream "experts" are quacks, but they sell a lot of books and get on TV so someone must be listening. I'm just not one of them.
Lyle
***Always remember, Lead By Example***
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
[email protected]
In a message dated 12/30/03 6:14:20 PM, jrossedd@... writes:
<< Well, I'm all for thinking parents instead of unthinking ones! But you
did only state the negative about experts and degrees and credentials, as did
Sandra imo, and above you do it again. >>
Some people "become experts" by doing no more than going through school doing
half-ass work and not understanding it, really. It think anyone who went to
school at ANY level, up to grad school, knows there are people like that.
And knowing that, then just a piece of paper doesn't make 'an expert.'
When someone really does know and care about a subject, what I respect is the
cool ideas he or she has and the way in which they're expressed. If a person
can make a subject really accessible and fascinating to others, then that's
something to care about. Lots of times those people have college degrees or
years in the field, but sometimes they don't.
And sometimes someone is new to something and comes up with an incredible
insight that changes the lives around them and changes the knowledge base of
experts, who go back to their drawing boards and research and change what they
thought they knew.
But anyone, whether a college student or doctoral candidate or ten year old,
who trusts one source instead of waiting/thinking/trying/looking further, is
not doing much thinking, is doing NO research, and is not (in my opinion)
earning trust or faith.
Why is that something to argue against?
I don't believe there's any field which consists of all upright and competent
practitioners. I don't believe there is any degree field in which someone
hasn't pretty much bluffed or lucked or finagled into a degreed position.
-=- Maybe this is one of those things you find has to be overstated to
be
heard through hser expert awe?-=-
No more than any other truism that people will accept without reflection.
-=-My experience has been more the opposite --
hsers (and parents generally) tending to dismiss ideas and to trash experts
and
anyone formally educated or credentialed just because they *are*, without
listening or thinking. -=-
Do you have examples of times when parents have trashed experts because
they're experts, regardless of what their positions/advice included?
There are "reading experts" who have never taught a child to read. There are
reading experts who have never even TRIED to teach a child to read. But
they've read a lot of "studies" and can recite the names of lots of "disorders"
and can talk about what research was popular in which decade and what has been
found not to work. They won't add the current cutting edge theories, though.
People in ten or fifteen years will include today's theories in those that
didn't work. So what's the value of reading experts in general, as a field?
Some fields of expertise are somewhat bogus in and of themselves. Some come
and go. MAYBE there's value, but they're seen as dubious fields. Phrenology,
for example. UFO research. Creation Science.
Helpful information can come from unexpected sources. Bullshit can come from
PhDs. Then how is a person to decide?
Examination of the ideas, trying them out in real situations, seeing if they
seem workable.
Sandra
<< Well, I'm all for thinking parents instead of unthinking ones! But you
did only state the negative about experts and degrees and credentials, as did
Sandra imo, and above you do it again. >>
Some people "become experts" by doing no more than going through school doing
half-ass work and not understanding it, really. It think anyone who went to
school at ANY level, up to grad school, knows there are people like that.
And knowing that, then just a piece of paper doesn't make 'an expert.'
When someone really does know and care about a subject, what I respect is the
cool ideas he or she has and the way in which they're expressed. If a person
can make a subject really accessible and fascinating to others, then that's
something to care about. Lots of times those people have college degrees or
years in the field, but sometimes they don't.
And sometimes someone is new to something and comes up with an incredible
insight that changes the lives around them and changes the knowledge base of
experts, who go back to their drawing boards and research and change what they
thought they knew.
But anyone, whether a college student or doctoral candidate or ten year old,
who trusts one source instead of waiting/thinking/trying/looking further, is
not doing much thinking, is doing NO research, and is not (in my opinion)
earning trust or faith.
Why is that something to argue against?
I don't believe there's any field which consists of all upright and competent
practitioners. I don't believe there is any degree field in which someone
hasn't pretty much bluffed or lucked or finagled into a degreed position.
-=- Maybe this is one of those things you find has to be overstated to
be
heard through hser expert awe?-=-
No more than any other truism that people will accept without reflection.
-=-My experience has been more the opposite --
hsers (and parents generally) tending to dismiss ideas and to trash experts
and
anyone formally educated or credentialed just because they *are*, without
listening or thinking. -=-
Do you have examples of times when parents have trashed experts because
they're experts, regardless of what their positions/advice included?
There are "reading experts" who have never taught a child to read. There are
reading experts who have never even TRIED to teach a child to read. But
they've read a lot of "studies" and can recite the names of lots of "disorders"
and can talk about what research was popular in which decade and what has been
found not to work. They won't add the current cutting edge theories, though.
People in ten or fifteen years will include today's theories in those that
didn't work. So what's the value of reading experts in general, as a field?
Some fields of expertise are somewhat bogus in and of themselves. Some come
and go. MAYBE there's value, but they're seen as dubious fields. Phrenology,
for example. UFO research. Creation Science.
Helpful information can come from unexpected sources. Bullshit can come from
PhDs. Then how is a person to decide?
Examination of the ideas, trying them out in real situations, seeing if they
seem workable.
Sandra
Fetteroll
on 12/30/03 8:08 PM, jrossedd@... at jrossedd@... wrote:
understand for themselves. They see that something is written by an expert
and trust what follows rather than trying to figure out if it's true or not.
And some experts -- and all self-styled experts -- take advantage of the
fact of human nature that it's easier to impress people than to educate
people.
It's not a poke at all experts. It's a two barbed joking observation on the
people who trust experts blindly and on "experts" that take advantage of
that.
Joyce
> Well, I'm all for thinking parents instead of unthinking ones! But youIt's an observation that many people tend to want to trust rather than
> did only state the negative about experts and degrees and credentials, as did
> Sandra imo, and above you do it again. Not meaning to argue, just reading
> what you are writing while also noticing what you are *not* writing.
understand for themselves. They see that something is written by an expert
and trust what follows rather than trying to figure out if it's true or not.
And some experts -- and all self-styled experts -- take advantage of the
fact of human nature that it's easier to impress people than to educate
people.
It's not a poke at all experts. It's a two barbed joking observation on the
people who trust experts blindly and on "experts" that take advantage of
that.
Joyce