Can We Trust the Experts?

Can We Trust the Experts?

https://amgreatness.com/2020/04/13/can-we-trust-the-experts/

Excerpt: Science used to be rooted in experiments. This is where the scientific method comes in. It’s not a question of authority or title or credentials, but of testing. You have a hypothesis and conduct an experiment that proves or disproves it. Everything is provisional because everything can possibly be falsified and displaced. A guy in his garage who is honest and on the ball could disprove a Newton, theoretically, through the same method. Science, though, has undergone much of the same managerial revolution as the rest of life. It is now about “peer review,” which, unlike falsifiable hypotheses and testing, is a mere simulacrum of the scientific method. Secondary considerations like diversity may come into play. Nothing is “blind,” and reputation carries some weight. Much of the science may not even involve testing at all, but rather elaborate, non-falsifiable models. This is especially apparent in areas where a lot of money may be on the line, such as medicine and climate science or expert witness testimony. Needless to say, when “peer-reviewed” work has been tested, much of it has come up snake eyes. This is the “replication” crisis, which has shown that much of “science” in the age of peer review may not be worth a damn. {I think the short answer to that question is “not really.” Not only have we learned the hard way that “experts” often have a different outcome in mind than we do, we’ve also learned that they’ll be “selective” of what info they use to support their “advice.” That doesn’t mean we should ignore them out of hand, but it does mean we have to think for ourselves, too. BS is BS, regardless of who heaps it on us or how high the pile is. Ron P.]