Importance Of Opinions Of Experts In Knowledge Acquisition Philosophy

Essay add: 28-10-2015, 12:10   /   Views: 2 465

How important are the opinions of experts in the search for knowledge? The role and significance of experts and their judgment in the search for knowledge are dependent on the following three factors: the level of influence an expert holds inside a field, the factors that limit knowledge in this field, and if the "expert" is really a specialist with knowledge to support their claims.

When finding out how important the opinions of experts are within the search for knowledge, it will be proper to first define what precisely expert, knowledge and opinion actually really mean in the context of this debate. An expert is a person who has knowledge or has special skills. Knowledge refers to justified true beliefs. These definitions are important since they enable us to distinguish between people assumed to be experts and experts. An opinion is a judgment or view formed concerning something, not essentially based on fact or knowledge. The role of experts in a field depends on their opinions about that field, so, actually, the role of their opinions and that of experts is indistinguishable.

There are a number of factors that determine what limits knowledge in the given field of knowledge. For instance, if new discoveries depend on a pre-existing base of full theoretical knowledge, as is frequently the case with higher research in natural sciences or mathematics, then experts are the very essential since they are only ones that can contribute. An example is Fermat's Last Theorem in mathematics. Andrew Wiles, who is an expert in mathematics, identified an error in the theorem and corrected it. This shows how experts do have an important role in discovering new knowledge, however also in ensuring that the beliefs that the believed knowledge contains really are true and justified.

On the other hand, if knowledge is restricted by other factors, for instance physical proximity, it is likely for a layman to make a momentous discovery. It is not extraordinary for a farmer to stumble upon an important archeological uncover while plowing his meadows, for instance. Certainly, the archeologists who then exhume the site and deduce the findings are significant in their own right, however in such a case the originator acts as a kind of catalyst within the search for knowledge, and is vital. Furthermore, this case proves that the role of experts within the search for knowledge differs within areas of knowledge. As verified, experts in mathematics are significant throughout the whole procedure of discovery, whereas in history, they are important only in the assessment of discoveries. Certainly they may locate discoveries as well; however it is not compulsory for the discoverer to be necessarily an expert.

An expert can always notify the society what has been experienced before within the technology and, on that foundation, experts help us foresee what will therefore be expected to occur in future. However this assumes the base remains constant. When looking at arts, this is even more doubtful because the foundation is emotional response; and for the humanities, the base is humanity and consequently unclear where axioms are concerned.

An expert depends on the nature of the problem. There are different types of experts. A legal expert is needed when there is legal problem and a medical expert is required when there is a moral problem related to health. We easily rely on experts because we do not believe in ourselves and we need a special authority figure to offer guidance. In the field of art, an expert's opinions a better insight in the eminence of art works. This is because they have special skills in judging the quality of the art work.

Historical experts appear to thrive on the disagreements between their opinions regarding events during their search for knowledge and better comprehension of the past. Very similar events can attract very different opinions. This difference of opinions in experts can have a detrimental consequence on our search for knowledge. The society can be confused on whose opinion to believe in.

The society plays a big role in determining who an expert is since it is the society that analyzes an individual, to find the special skills to call someone an expert. Most of the times, if someone has extra knowledge that what an ordinary person has the society think of him as an expert. There are consequences of listening too much to an expert. Experts' opinions might be very vital in the search for knowledge; on the other hand it can as well be very risky. Firstly we should reflect on whether or not we believe the experts. Not everyone is faultless; experts can as well make mistakes. It is likely that an expert can verify something which is incorrect, and we will all suppose it is true, trust it is true and the expert can validate it; however it will be false knowledge. Some of the theories that were thought to be knowledge are that the center of the universe was the earth; another theory was that the earth was flat. Everybody thought this was factual, until somebody proved it false. Consequently we cannot constantly claim that the opinions of experts are at all times correct, hence it is not always important. Nevertheless to have done moved steps ahead and to have advanced, expert opinions are so important.

On the other hand, when we listen too little to experts there are as well consequences. An example is meteorologists, these are experts in weather and climate, if they warn the society that there will be a calamity for instance floods, hurricane or earthquakes and people refuse to vacate or take caution, this will be so dangerous as it will cost human lives.

Mostly the society do confuse between the authority and experts. An authority is a person or organization having power in a particular, characteristically administrative or political, area. Despite the fact that it is possible for one to be an authority and an expert, not all authorities are experts and not all experts are authorities. The search for knowledge is greatly achieved when the authorities are experts, and they are able to review new ideas in an unbiased way. Occasionally the authorities can, effectively, act as gatekeepers inside the field, acknowledging only researchers who concur with the contemporary theories, to the disadvantage of the field. Authorities within a particular field, it does not matter if they are experts or not, can influence the search for knowledge merely by determining the course of research.

It is pretty simple to determine who an authority inside a certain field is. On the other hand, realizing who the true experts are is a different matter entirely. possibly this is why people frequently assume that being an authority within a particular field, one automatically qualifies to be an expert in that field, which brings about a lot of confusion. When assessing someone's claims and trying to decide whether they are an expert or not, it is essential to consider whether their goal appears to be to report equitable information, rather than convince. Additionally, authorities who do not admit limitations and counter-arguments are less likely to be reliable.

The importance of experts inside a field relies on whether the expert is actually an expert with knowledge to support his claims or just perceived as such. Additionally, authorities who are not experts might often be assumed to be experts, and as a result have a counterproductive power on the search for knowledge.

Expert opinions are very important, since they have studied the definite subject area and have experience inside that field, and anyone can use their information during their own search for knowledge. It is essential to keep in mind that experts are still common people; moreover their opinions are prejudiced as human beings are. Expert opinions ought to be used as a basis of any person's comprehension of in their subject, if they are clueless concerning it.

In conclusion, the opinions of experts are very fundamental in our search for knowledge. This is for the reason that if expert opinions were not significant we would not require experts in our daily lives. They have special skills in the related field having studied the area well. They help us in areas that we have inadequate knowledge by this they help us discover new technology. Knowledge is a justified true belief and for this reason, experts have gained a lot extra knowledge within their specific field to offer valid opinions. For instance, if one needs help in mathematics he or she would rather go and get the opinion from someone who has studied arithmetic rather than an ordinary person who has no clue about mathematics. Consequently experts' opinions are very important in the search for knowledge.

Article name: Importance Of Opinions Of Experts In Knowledge Acquisition Philosophy essay, research paper, dissertation