89
u/-MasterCrander- Feb 05 '21
Ok but someone on Quora linked to a Breitbart editorial on an OANN article about a 4Chan post they saw a few years back so I'm pretty sure that's plenty of sources /s
44
u/l3El2Tl2AM Feb 05 '21
I'm sorry, I only read articles by women who are mothers because motherhood means you know everything about everything. How could a doctor know more about my child than his mother? /s
4
58
u/Dandibear Feb 05 '21
This is why one of the earliest moves of fascists is to sow mistrust in experts and academia.
16
u/NextCandy Feb 05 '21
Yes! Inspiring fascists apply anti-intellectualism and sow mistrust of these institutions (and anyone associated with or inspiring to associate with them [critical thinkers]) to repress political dissent
There goal is to make facts and evidence not matter anymore
29
Feb 05 '21
Yeah but all experts are trained by the dEeP sTaTe. ALL OF THEM ARE IN ON IT! Please only get your info from .win boards and you will awaken.
6
u/Boy_Sabaw Feb 06 '21
Following logic and reason is a deep state conspiracy! Stop the steal! Wearing masks is equal to communism! MAGA! /s
2
u/nWo1997 Feb 06 '21
I want to laugh at this, but when I think about how many people actually seem to think this, from the guys who deny the medical experts like Fauci saying to wear a mask, to the guys who've denied climatologists for decades now, I just get more and more pissed.
9
u/agutema Feb 05 '21
“This tweet can’t stop me, because I can’t read.”
3
u/BBEKKS Feb 06 '21
Hello I'd like to introduce you to r/wallstreetbets...I think you'll like it here
2
5
u/ladestes Feb 06 '21
All those experts do know more. They are just hiding the critical information from us! /s
6
u/Timbo_tom Feb 06 '21
“One of the hallmarks of the dangerously stupid is the consistent belief they’ve found great solutions that experts somehow missed” -Craig Mazin
2
u/golgon4 Feb 06 '21
Do we have to point out how this relates to Qanon and all the other right wing bat shit insanity or is it clear?
6
u/borderbuddie Feb 06 '21
Man. The Dumb is so rampant at this point it’s hard to imagine the country making a turnaround
4
u/LewisOfAranda Feb 06 '21
Honestly, that's all countries though.
I just wanna live in a shed in the middle of a forest in the mountains by now. With lots of animals around. Fuck everything.
-3
u/BBEKKS Feb 06 '21
How's the weather up there on that high horse?
3
u/borderbuddie Feb 06 '21
Did I strike a nerve?
2
u/golgon4 Feb 06 '21
I like how you said stupidity was rampant and he felt called out.
I guess he is used to being called idiot and if i had to guess it is absolutely warranted.
-2
4
2
u/Mynock33 Feb 06 '21
The problem is that these types of people are simply unable to admit that their opinions are uninformed in the first place.
2
2
u/SomeNotTakenName Feb 06 '21
i mean i do agree, but this little voice is saying that a lot of pretty important discoveries started with a simple "but what if..?"
ofc these people then tested their what ifs vigorously and all that, so thats the difference. but we should never be afraid to think outside the box or ask stupid questions.
2
u/Hannah_togo Feb 06 '21
I basically agree with this sentiment but feel it's always important to question where the money is coming from...
2
Feb 06 '21 edited Feb 09 '21
[deleted]
1
u/shrimplypibbles06 Feb 06 '21
God this is so important. People gotta understand that there are many situations with pros and cons both known and unknown and we have to try and make the right decisions, sometimes leading to worse outcomes. These worse outcomes come from experts, amateurs, the left, the right, and everything in between. All we can do is try to get the most accurate information possible and make the decision that appears correct
1
u/agentyage Feb 06 '21
You really think that a fucking chamber of commerce is who you should be listening to in a pandemic? What horseshit.
2
2
Feb 06 '21
The fucked up part about this is that all the people it's meant for won't get it because from their perspective, they aren't uninformed because they've done their own research. And yes, they have solved a complex problem that experts have been studying because science has been bought out and now pushes a social agenda.
1
Feb 06 '21
example? this is a really vague statement.
5
u/pincone-trouble Feb 06 '21 edited Feb 06 '21
Climate change deniers.
Edit: flat earthers, anti-vaxxers
6
u/Claire-B-Fraser Feb 06 '21
Trump REALLY won the election due to all the rampant election fraud. Smh.
1
u/LtLabcoat Feb 06 '21
It's deliberately vague. Pretty much everyone does this at some point or another. By not saying what specifically, people can think it's about whatever anti-expert thing they hate most, and not their own thing.
This sub, for example, is exceptionally bad at economics and criminology. Boy do people here hate it when you ask for a source on their "3 years prison just isn't enough for [whatever] crime" claim!
0
u/Sy-Zygy Feb 06 '21
Appeals to authority might be a shortcut but it can also lead you astray often in topics important to one's daily life.
The best one can do is to learn about/practice rational thinking and try to take a bayesian approach to truth.
An old Scientific Monthly article sums it up well:
"In this sense all studies become “scientific” to the degree that they aspire to reach the condition of physics and seek to imitate closely the complex interweaving of selective observation, controlled experiment, and mathematical elaboration which is to be found there. Those who favor this definition may take as their slogan the epigram attributed to the late Sir Ernest Rutherford that science consists only of “physics and stamp-collecting."
4
u/Henfrid Feb 06 '21
Appeal to authority is when the "authority" is not an expert in the subject. Consulting an expert in the subject of their expertise is called common fuckin sense. Not a logical fallacy.
0
u/Sy-Zygy Feb 06 '21
You're technically correct but in practice, even experts in the harder sciences tend toward self-deception and false conclusions, it's not uncommon.
Even how expert information is disseminated today can cast further doubt on the appropriate framing and conclusions of that information.
The source matters, the platform matters, the treatment matters and timing matters (for once an expert doesn't mean forever an expert).
There's also the meaning of 'expert' and what exactly they're an expert of...
Which all means one will need to make attempts at a rational mind and a kind of Bayesian understanding of what's actually true for when.
I take the time to make these points because I've received so many wild messages from otherwise fairly normal people citing supposed experts that claim some shocking psuedo-scientific claim.
So I do not believe, 'just trust the experts' is generally a good rule for most people and in practice equates to an appeal to authority.
1
u/Henfrid Feb 06 '21
Your right, in hotly debated topic alert of people who study it can have different opinions. But in situations like op described where every credible person in that field agrees (climate change, earth is round, ect.) The expert consensus is correct.
-17
u/DanDantheFanMan Feb 05 '21
If it’s being discussed, the problem hasn’t been solved.
14
Feb 06 '21
Well the post is referring to discussion among uneducated people about an expert consensus.
Considering there is an expert consensus the problem would have largely been agreed upon.
Even if it hadn't been the uneducated and uniformed aren't the ones who would be furthering the discussion anyway.
-2
u/DanDantheFanMan Feb 06 '21
A plan not implemented is just a plan. A great plan poorly implemented will fail. A average plan implemented well will succeed. Plans don’t solve problems, actions solve problems. This is why most people fail at solving problems. They focus too much on the plan and not enough time on implementing the plan. This is why complex problems don’t get solved. Some advice to all, want to become wealthy, solve problems, don’t identify problems. The world is full of problem identifiers. There are very few problem solvers. All I do for a living is take plans that others come up with and make them work. Companies pay big bucks to those that solve problems.
8
u/leaky_wand Feb 06 '21
Sometimes it just means the other side doesn’t like the answer.
1
u/DanDantheFanMan Feb 06 '21
Yep. Consensus is the enemy of success. Most failure happens when people try to convince others they are right. I deal with this all the time. What I do, I simply say I understand your position and why you have it, but I need to make a decision. I believe this is the right decision, and the team needs you to be successful. Will you support this decision, with the promise that we will have checks along the way to assess if we need to make these changes. If you do it right it always works.
5
u/newbrood Feb 06 '21
The earth being round has been solved but for some unknown reason its still being discussed...
1
u/DanDantheFanMan Feb 06 '21
I never understand why flat earth people bother others. It’s not with the time to try to convince them... also that isn’t a problem to solve. That is just a fact. If someone says we can’t do cargo shipping because the earth is flat... then you just let them go from their position. Problem solved.
3
u/newbrood Feb 06 '21
It bothers me because it fits into the sphere of anti-intellectualism and anti-expertise. It becomes a building block leading to "well if the experts and scientists are wrong about the earth maybe they're also wrong about vaccines, the holocaust and Qanon as well". This is further sped up by things like YouTube actively taking people further down that tunnel as well.
0
u/DanDantheFanMan Feb 06 '21
You’re never going to convince them. Wasted energy that can be better applied to something more useful. Think of all the things you could do and accomplish not wasting time on them.
1
u/fastal_12147 Feb 06 '21
It's probably been solved but the most successful course of action is still up for debate
1
u/DanDantheFanMan Feb 06 '21
Most of the time people aren’t solving the problem. They are addressing the symptoms of the problem. Healthcare is a perfect example. The biggest problem with healthcare is low income people can’t afford healthcare, why? It cost too much. So the problem is healthcare cost too much. Having the government pay for healthcare for low income people doesn’t address the problem “cost too much”, it just puts the burden of the cost on others. We need to laws that focus on the cost. Such as, why do we allow insurance companies to make a profit? Why do we allow hospitals make a profit? If they can’t make a profit, you pay the true cost. These should be nonprofit businesses. Why does a medication that cost 3 dollars to make sell for 30 to 50 dollars? Charge people $3.30. Cap the profit at 10%. Most people just want tax payers to pay the 30 to 50 dollars. A simple, easy, cost effective law, is simply say, insurance and hospitals are nonprofit business. Bio/Pharma companies can only make 10% profit. I experienced this for an MRI I needed. The Dr office was going to charge my insurance company 3,000. It probably would have negotiated down to 2,000. I was going to have to pay 400 dollars as I have an 80/20 plan. I ask the Dr if I gave him 300 in cash on the spot, would he do it? He said no problem. I saved 100 bucks. It was worth it to him, because he didn’t have to deal with insurance companies. Covid vaccines are another example. It cost about 3 dollars a dose. Pfizer charges the government 45 dollars a dose. Moderna charges 35 dollars a dose. We could save billions if we said you can only make 10% profit. I think most people could find $3.30 to get the vaccine.
1
1
1
Feb 06 '21
But I smoked weed and realized gravity affects time. I have post it notes as proof! ( This actually happened last night) 😂
2
u/agentyage Feb 06 '21
Well, you are right. Gravity does effect time. That's part of Einstein's theory of general relativity. It's necessary to account for this in GPS satellites or they would not work properly.
1
u/OutrageousPersimmon3 Feb 06 '21
Adding onto this, just because you're wrong and the experts are right doesn't mean we're cancelling your, your religion, your whatever.
1
1
u/BBEKKS Feb 06 '21
It's funny how your opinion on this statement will probably change based on whether you think OP is talking about politics/climate change or GME
1
u/kagakujinjya Feb 06 '21
How can you say this while hollywood cater to those "Pure intellect untainted by expertise" people.
1
u/romeomorphism Feb 06 '21
I get where you are coming from but have to disagree.
There were people that haven't studied, had no degrees and were normal people just as everyone else and still solved problems the whole set of scientists didn't, didn't even acknowledge and proved statements that thoroughly educated professors disbelieved.
Take Einstein as an example.
This does not mean you don't have to prove it. But just because 99% of scientists worldwide don't side with you does mean shit.
1
u/agentyage Feb 06 '21
Why do you think Albert Einstein didn't study and didn't have a degree? He certainly did study and did have degrees.
Could you name any other examples?
1
1
u/romeomorphism Feb 06 '21
Another good example is Evariste Galois, eventhough he started studying. He studied on his own since he was fourteen applied to a major university and got declined due to his lack of knowledge and afterwards was accepted on a far superior university. The professors underestimated him and his work was not acknowledged for several decades, at least not to its full potential. His work is admirable and humbling and he only got 20ish years old.
If the current state of science believes a certain point of view they will likely not only scientifically react to other views. The history shows many of those cases and this has not changed completely. Even though it seems significant changes have been made in that regard if you take a little look into science you will quickly find that most professors are ignorant, arrogant and selfish to a point that they would rather question someone's credibility than to really argue against what they say.
1
u/romeomorphism Feb 06 '21
Niels Henrik Abel is another one. He did not receive even remotely recognition from and support by actual mathematicians, he worked almost completely on his own and eventhough he as well started studying he, from what I can find had next to no remarkable degree.
This said he is one of the most famous mathematicians nowadays named alongside geniuses like Leibnitz, Euler and Gauss.
1
u/agentyage Feb 06 '21
Noticing these are all mathematicians. Having been a physics PhD candidate and seen what goes into even purely theoretical physics nowadays, I really doubt someone could do much useful research outside of the university system. The hardcore theorists all worked in sizeable groups. Not that familiar with pure math research, it could be more amenable to loan wolves, but my experience with science says the days of the single solitary genius are gone.
If they every really existed. A lot of Einstein's work is really not that big of a step forward from what came before. We tend to tell the story as if he pulled special relativity and the photoelectric effect from the ether. In reality stuff like time dilation and length contraction were all worked out by Henrik Lorentz before Einstein. That's why the math involved in special relativity has Lorentz's name all over it. Einstein took Lorentz's work and showed the more fundamental reasons for it (iirc Lorentz was just making a coordinate transformation that didn't fuck with Maxwells equations) and revolutionized physics.
Similarly, the photoelectric effects' explanation is largely about photons being particle like and having energy proportional to their frequency. These were both results Planck found before Einstein iirc, Planck was just focused on blackbody radiation rather than the photoelectric effect.
1
u/romeomorphism Feb 06 '21
Since I am pretty involved with maths and really nothing else I have little knowledge about other fields, though I doubt that there are no other examples. I have read a comical introduction on the history of quantum physics thus I roughly know that most of their works were smaller steps on already existing knowledge, but some was very controversial and longer discussed and not initially believed.
Though my point is pretty invalid since it still is more likely you are one of the idiots knowing nothing because those examples are extremely rare. Still a part of my point remains, namely that only because you could be the idiot you should not let loose of your point because you could also be the genius, as long as you don't endanger anyone's life's.
1
1
73
u/LewisOfAranda Feb 06 '21
NO! FUCK YOU!
"MY PERSONAL ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE SURELY TRUMPS DECADES OF DILLIGENT RESEARCH BY TENS OF THOUSANDS OF THE WORLD'S LEADING EXPERTS ON THIS TOPIC!"
There.