From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Fri Jul 26 2002 - 20:55:38 MDT
Harvey writes
> There is some value in seeking real advice from real professionals.
Granted.
> When posters seek medical advice on this list, I strongly urge them to
> seek a real doctor. When posters ask for legal advice on this list, I
> strongly urge them to seek a real lawyer. When posters ask for tax
> advice, I strongly urge them to seek a real accountant.
No argument here. But the real reason that there's no argument
here is that legal advice, medical advice, and tax advice seldom
relate to ideological differences. When ideological differences
are present, it becomes quite important for credentialed individuals
to realize the fact, and to conduct themselves accordingly. It was
entirely inappropriate, to use the most notorious example, for
nuclear physicists working on the atomic bomb to exploit their
position and fame when expressing opinions about international
policies and treaties.
> ...When discussing astronomical measurements, our resident
> astronomer would know more than the average star-watcher. When
> it comes to any technical or professional field, I want to know the
> difference between a trained professional with real experience and some
> armchair pundit with no qualifications, knowledge or experience.
Sometimes that's of interest to me, sometimes it's not. Usually,
it so happens, someone's expertise becomes apparent during the
course of exchanges. This doesn't suffer from the drawback, which
I emphasized in my previous post and you ignored, that continually
prefacing arguments with claims (true or not) of great expertise
has the effect of arguing from authority.
To push my point home, do you have any idea of how many times on
this forum you have referred to yourself as an expert in security
while presenting your arguments? Could you even submit the
closest power of ten? (I'm not including your signature line,
which, of course, is a different matter but does make the same
appeal.)
> Besides, it is standard and professional ethics to disclose one's
> credentials and qualifications when discussing any topic of a
> professional nature in public, or when giving professional advice or
> information within one's own field of expertise. It is only right to
> give full disclosure so that the listener can decide or investigate
> further.
Well, in the spirit of openness and full communication, one certainly
shouldn't make a secret of it. But again, continued references to
one's credentials, occupation, or previous experience has the explicit
effect---or at least appears to show the desire to have the effect---
of replacing logic and reasoned argument with appeal to authority.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:41 MST