▲ 24 ▼ Quick-match online gaming is a metaphor for today’s society: no one listens to the experts. (lemmy.world) submitted 1 day ago* by DandomRude@lemmy.world to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world 12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (2 children) All experts agree on all things which is why it's so easy to know what's correct and incorrect. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Photonic@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 child) No they don’t! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 child) In those cases, I'm the tiebreaker. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Photonic@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago Nonsense, they don’t even wear ties! They’re scientists, not hedge fund managers! permalink fedilink source parent [–] DandomRude@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 child) Experts undoubtedly agree on many points. The fact that they have differing opinions—and indeed should have them—is part of their craft, something on which they are in complete agreement, regardless of the field in question. Here's an example: A craftsman knows what a nail is, but how, when, and whether it should be hammered in is a matter of judgment. Edit: To put it more clearly: Someone who doesn't know what a nail is has no say in whether it's a good decision to use one. That’s not to say that the opinions of laypeople don’t matter, since they may very well be affected by the issue. My point is simply that nothing is less productive than someone trying to tell a craftsman how to do his job without having even the slightest clue about the subject. In this analogy, imagine a client who hires craftsmen and stands behind them the whole time, offering his uninformed opinions on everything they do—that only shows a lack of respect for the work of experts; it’s absolutely counterproductive. It would make much more sense to clearly state what you want and simply let people do their jobs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (1 child) How: with a hammer. When: as it’s needed, not subjective. Wheter: redundant, repetitive, covered by when. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DandomRude@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children) My fault: I had assumed that the people at Lemmy were capable of thinking abstractly. I've added an edit that might make it clearer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago Chillllllll permalink fedilink source parent [–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago* I don’t know how to articulate my point, so I’m a going to insult everyone else. Okay buddy. You’re better off using the “9 out of 10 dentists agree” analogy I think. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 child) No they don’t! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 child) In those cases, I'm the tiebreaker. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Photonic@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago Nonsense, they don’t even wear ties! They’re scientists, not hedge fund managers! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 child) In those cases, I'm the tiebreaker. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Photonic@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago Nonsense, they don’t even wear ties! They’re scientists, not hedge fund managers! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago Nonsense, they don’t even wear ties! They’re scientists, not hedge fund managers! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 child) Experts undoubtedly agree on many points. The fact that they have differing opinions—and indeed should have them—is part of their craft, something on which they are in complete agreement, regardless of the field in question. Here's an example: A craftsman knows what a nail is, but how, when, and whether it should be hammered in is a matter of judgment. Edit: To put it more clearly: Someone who doesn't know what a nail is has no say in whether it's a good decision to use one. That’s not to say that the opinions of laypeople don’t matter, since they may very well be affected by the issue. My point is simply that nothing is less productive than someone trying to tell a craftsman how to do his job without having even the slightest clue about the subject. In this analogy, imagine a client who hires craftsmen and stands behind them the whole time, offering his uninformed opinions on everything they do—that only shows a lack of respect for the work of experts; it’s absolutely counterproductive. It would make much more sense to clearly state what you want and simply let people do their jobs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (1 child) How: with a hammer. When: as it’s needed, not subjective. Wheter: redundant, repetitive, covered by when. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DandomRude@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children) My fault: I had assumed that the people at Lemmy were capable of thinking abstractly. I've added an edit that might make it clearer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago Chillllllll permalink fedilink source parent [–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago* I don’t know how to articulate my point, so I’m a going to insult everyone else. Okay buddy. You’re better off using the “9 out of 10 dentists agree” analogy I think. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (1 child) How: with a hammer. When: as it’s needed, not subjective. Wheter: redundant, repetitive, covered by when. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DandomRude@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children) My fault: I had assumed that the people at Lemmy were capable of thinking abstractly. I've added an edit that might make it clearer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago Chillllllll permalink fedilink source parent [–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago* I don’t know how to articulate my point, so I’m a going to insult everyone else. Okay buddy. You’re better off using the “9 out of 10 dentists agree” analogy I think. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children) My fault: I had assumed that the people at Lemmy were capable of thinking abstractly. I've added an edit that might make it clearer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago Chillllllll permalink fedilink source parent [–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago* I don’t know how to articulate my point, so I’m a going to insult everyone else. Okay buddy. You’re better off using the “9 out of 10 dentists agree” analogy I think. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago* I don’t know how to articulate my point, so I’m a going to insult everyone else. Okay buddy. You’re better off using the “9 out of 10 dentists agree” analogy I think. permalink fedilink source parent