I was arguing with an economist the other day about the relative merits of global warming.
He was challenging data on the grounds that it was incomplete. I sent him a whole list of data sources and pointed out that he could resolve his claim by examining the data itself.
His reply was illustrative: "Running the numbers personally on climate change issues is not my bag; my time is scarce and I am an economist (my specialized human capital is not in climate science, so to run the numbers myself competently, while within my abilities, would involve a huge opportunity cost in doing non-economic analyses)."
There are two threads here to unwind. First, what are you good at? What is the most productive use of your time? Second, how do you take that into account when you make decisions about what to believe?
I'm going to be a mathematician. I've been accepted into a Ph.D. program to study mathematics, and if I am going to become mathematically competent, I will need to spend most of my time studying math. The time I will spend studying math, however, is time I will not spend studying any multitude of other subjects — from physics to climate science, from rhetorical analysis to physiology, from car repair to flooring, to who knows what else.
At the end of the process, after the better part of a decade, I will certainly be able to claim specific expertise in math. But that specific expertise will come at a cost — I will not have specific expertise in numerous other areas. In questions of fact, I will ultimately have to defer to car mechanics on the inner workings of automobiles, to climatologists on global warming and to doctors on medicine. While I can gain knowledge — and perhaps more than the typical person — I will not be any sort of expert. My time will be best spent using specific training to further my career.
The same is true of you. You will have a particular profession and training, and as long as you have career prospects your best chance is to stick to what you know. This is not to say you should not be inquisitive, but recognize that your knowledge in other fields is severely limited.
How should you take this limitation into account when you're figuring out what's true and what's not?
As someone who is skeptical and not gullible, the decision to take someone's word, which is what you ultimately have to do if it's not your area of expertise, must take into account several factors: How much does that person know? How much do you know? What is the combined inclination of authorities in the field? Why do they make those judgments and how much weight should you give them?
You have to make this decision eventually on many different subjects as you rethink your opinions pending adulthood. In making the decision, you have to incorporate a degree of uncertainty into your opinion based on your inability to judge the matter yourself. The more study you make of the subject, the more certain you can become, but as long as you are not an expert, that uncertainty must remain large.
So the economist I was talking with ultimately had to defer direct assessment because it was simply not worth his time. He's skeptical, and while I don't agree with his assessment of climate science (I think he's severely underestimating the authority of actual climatologists), I respect that it would be irrational of him to try to become a climate scientist himself in pursuit of expertise.
After all, nobody has enough time to be an expert in every field.
Write to Neal at necoleman@bsu.edu.
Read More
Yorktown softball defeats Wes-Del in 2024 Delaware County Tournament Final
By David Moore / 4 hours agoThe championship game was set, Tigers vs. Warriors for the 2024 Delaware County crown. By the end of the afternoon, it was Yorktown running away, taking a 10-0 victory over the Warriors.
Over 3,000 Cardinals join the Ball State family of alumni following commencement
By Ella Howell / 8 hours agoThe Quad filled with approximately 3,000 graduating Cardinals and their loved ones the morning of May 4 in preparation for the 198th Ball State University Commencement.
