Re: [Phys-l] Scientists speaking outside their fields. Was... The Cause of Global Warming...

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

"Look to the message and not to the messenger."


I thought the point was, what does one do when one can't evaluate the 
message because it's too complicated w/o spending an unreasonable time 
to "bone up"?  

This reminds me of the time (c 1960) when I applied as General Atomics 
and was told you're good; return when you have at least an MA.  The 
interviewer explained the additional "practice", tho it might not apply 
to GA's mission, would give me general skills applicable.  That's what I 
though higher ed. was about, so I'll evaluate the messenger's 
credentials if I can't evaluate the message.

Another point; if the pill isn't worse than the cold, I say take the 
pill, just in case.   The precautionary principle implies:

   "... a willingness to take action in advance of scientific proof
   [or] evidence of the need for the proposed action on the grounds
   that further delay will prove ultimately most costly to society and
   nature, and, in the longer term, selfish and unfair to future
   generations." [8] <http://dieoff.org/page31.htm>



bc


Jack Uretsky wrote:

> I agree with John and  Aristotle. Look to the message and not to the 
> messenger.
>
> And, like any good trial lawyer, it is my obligation to present the 
> message skilfully.  If you want an example, look at the Plaintiff's 
> initial presentation in the Dover School Board trial.
>
> 				Regards,
> 						Jack
>
>
>
>
> I
> vOn Mon, 21 May 2007, Michael Edmiston wrote:
>
>  
>
> > John Denker has responded to my questions by saying I am asking about a form
> > of "appeal to authority."  He goes on to restate a paragraph we've seen
> > before about an expert's statement being wrong if it's wrong and a
> > 10-year-old non-expert being right if he's right.
> >
> > Yes, of course I'm asking about how much we trust authority; that's the
> > point of my questions.  And of course an expert can make wrong statements,
> > either accidentally or intentionally, and of course a 10-year old can make a
> > lucky guess and be correct.  How does that help the discussion?
> >
> > If you don't have the ability or time or money to figure something out
> > yourself, who are you going to trust?  That an expert could be wrong and a
> > 10-year old could be correct are not going to make me start asking
> > ten-year-olds advice about global warming, or to diagnose what is wrong with
> > my car, or why I have indigestion, or how to manage my retirement portfolio.
> >
> > As people with less authority, or fewer credentials, or less experience
> > interact with those who have the authority, credentials, experience I would
> > hope the authority figures would be honest, talk about uncertainty, explain
> > the ways that less experienced scientists misunderstand the data or the
> >    

cut