[image source: https://blog.grabcad.com/blog/2019/01/22/when-experts-are-wrong/]
This week we watched Dr. Roger Koppl talk about his book Expert Failure. The books itself talks about experts and how they have failed, arguing that empowering them can be problematic and could create more issues then solutions.
To begin, my opinion on experts. I think that they are necessary and important, though we do need be careful to not take their word as law. Not everyone is capable of knowing as much as experts or research to support/contradict experts. People give up their lives for their field, dismissing them as people paid for their opinion is just so short-sighted. Though, most individuals do have some kind of ulterior motive or bias. I do not know as much as a doctor does, therefore I am should take their word over mine when it comes to his field. On the other hand, it is true that doctors are wrong and ignorant many times - people of color and many women have found that doctors don't know as much, or are just plain dismissive of their health/opinions that they purposefully miss something. Also, in terms of things like hysterectomy's, I known some women who have been denied surgery simply because, in the doctors opinion "she'll regret it" or they base it off an imaginary husbands want for kids. Another example would be cars! I don't know anything about cars so I'm not about to pop the hood and dig around when a light pops up on my dash, but mechanics 100% have tried to ripped me off before because I don't know anything about cars. So I guess they are important and I am always going to depend on experts to help (I can't study medicine, learn cars, and everything else, I'm one person) but it is also important to be wary and get second, third, even fourth opinions, from different experts in the same field. It's going to four different doctors, different mechanics, etc to truly know that you are getting the best advice possible.
I don't like his definition of experts - and how he gave the example that race car drivers aren't experts because they're not payed to give an opinion. I totally think that they need to be considered experts, they're some of the best in their field. They're expert drivers who can outmaneuver the average driver (or, at the very least, myself). I think that by keeping the definition narrow, it only supports Dr. Koppl's view, which may be why he did it, and it excludes a lot of people.
The examples he gave of experts, specifically the Android one, just really show that we need to listen to neutral experts, if such a thing exists. Trusting Android experts on products that they sell, it's not surprising that they weren't completely honest. My question is it an expert failure, or a failure on accountability? Truthfully, those experts very much succeeded, they saved the company, they weren't doing it for the public. It's important to hold them accountable and create consequences for experts who lie or abuse their authority and knowledge. Like when researchers forge their research/evidence and then having their reputation stained and loosing their reputation/grants. Or doctors who loose their license.
I do think we need to start teaching and emphasizing the important skill of analyzing experts. It's similar to writing a paper, it's important to know the difference between a good source and a bad one. By knowing this and being able to differentiate between good sources and bad, you don't need to know the content. You can see who is saying this, study why (including funding/affiliation/etc) and determine that that is not a good source to trust and listen to.