(October 11, 2012 at 11:00 pm)cratehorus Wrote:(October 11, 2012 at 10:42 pm)Ryantology Wrote: Is this opposed to the average person simply deferring to higher authority in all matters?
Screw that.
Let's say, for some strange reason, at one point in your life, you NEEDED to know something really complicated about, The Star Wars movies.
Nobody could really blame you for not spending all your life learning all the details about Star Wars.
And if you were a Star wars expert you certainly wouldn't appreciate someone telling you the "real" reason capt picard kicked luke skywalker down a mountain on the death star.....when he's neever even seen the fucking movie much less wasted his whole life studying the movies over and over. Just because he happens to need the information at the moment.......too win a bet, let's say
In this instance, then yes, deferring to the clearly more knowledgeable party is best. But, this is a pretty simple example you've offered, in which one party is clearly right and the other wrong.
When the question is 'how do we fix the economy', what is the 'right' answer? What do we do when the alleged authorities on the subject can't even agree on an approach to the problem much less craft a solution to it?
I defer to authority when that authority earns the right to my deference by a clear demonstration of superior expertise. I defy authority and posit my own ideas when I'm truly convinced mine are better than whatever else is out there. Usually, I'm somewhere in the middle of that.
However, I think no authority should ever be unquestioned.
