Guest thermalman Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) How such bp? For me, expertise comes from gaining knowledge of an object or subject, seen or unseen, from reading, studying, experimenting, conversing/discussing, constructive/critical thinking, logic, reasoning....all gathered towards a knowledgable experience in such a way that one can provide answers to others who need their questions answered for a particular object/subject. Isn't that why you're here bp? Edited October 11, 2012 by thermalman
Guest Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) dealing with something that actually has been proven to exist perhaps. Mulder's objects of veneration, fraid not. The "legitimacy" of the topic is not relevant to the issue of expertise. A person can, for example, be an expert phrenologist, having read all available material on phrenology, having practiced phrenology for many years, and in general being very skilled and knowledgeable as a phrenologist. Does that make phrenology a vaild science? No, nor am I arguing that it does. But that person IS an "expert" in phrenology according to the standard accepted definition of the word. And I object strongly to your use of religiously connotated words to describe my position vis a vis BF experts. How such? For me, expertise comes from gaining knowledge of an object or subject, seen or unseen, from reading, studying, experimenting, conversing/discussing, constructive/critical thinking, logic, reasoning....all gathered towards a knowledgable experience in such a way that one can provide answers to others who need their questions answered. Isn't that why you're here bp? Based on his postings, I'd say he's here to pot-stir and make snarky comments. Guess that's HIS expertise. By the way, baboonpete, I thought you were Ignoring me...? Edited October 11, 2012 by Mulder
Guest Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 OK, what about cryptozoologists? Are they to be concidered experts? Is there even any formal education one must have in order to call him or herself a crypyozoologist, or can anyone who studies creatures unproven by science call themselves a cryptozoologists? And if so can they give themselves the Dr. title, lol? In my opinion, if you hold a degree in zoology then you have the right to call yourself a zoologist and with this comes the Dr. title thus making you an expert. So if you hold a degree in zoology and you study creatures unproven by science then yes you can call yourself a cryptozoologist including the Dr. title thus making you an expert. However I have an open mind and I am aware that like in all industries and fields of study you have people who are top shelf at what they do and people who are low shelf at what they do. Both with whatever crudentials in that particular field, would be concidered experts. Unfortunitally, this is just how it is. So unless you have some type of crudentials, you are not legally an expert. And the Legal part is the bottom line. When Sasquatch is finally proven to exist, there is going to be lots of research grants available. Unfortunitally, all the people with crudentials who all along have been insisting Sasquatch does not exist, they will be first in line to get the grants. And they'll get them too. It's ********, but that is just the way is. Sorry Lone S I had to point this out, one or two other posts had implied similar too. Pulled from wiki... In the United States and Canada, most standard academic programs are based on the four-year bachelor's degree, most often Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), or Bachelor of Science ( B.S./B.Sc.), a one- or two-year master's degree (most often Master of Arts (M.A.), or Master of Science (M.S./M.Sc.); either of these programs might be as much as three years in length), and a further one or two years of coursework and research, culminating in "comprehensive" examinations in one or more fields, plus perhaps some teaching experience, and then the writing of a dissertation for the doctorate, most often Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.), or other types such as Doctor of Education (Ed.D.), Doctor of Psychology (Psy.D.),Doctor of Theology, (Th.D.), for a total of ten or more years from starting the bachelor's degree (which is usually begun around age 18) to the awarding of the doctorate. You can do it in considerably less, or at least in the UK you can by converting a research Masters degree into a PhD and completing and passing for your doctorate. Not sure if you're able to do this convert/shortcut Stateside? Basically there is a whole world of difference between obtaining your bare bones academic degree as it where and obtaining your doctorate and then (and only then) truly and/or rightfully being able to call yourself a Dr. of anything, and yes like you said and as with any profession there are "top shelf" and "low shelf" individuals in any given field whether it be bigfoot research, sports therapy, particle physics or anything you care to think of. Just about anyone academically inclined could go out and get themselves a degree if they put their minds to it. Not everyone could go out and get themselves a doctorate.
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 I think if someone is extremely well versed in the bigfoot phenomenon, they could absolutely rise to the level of expert. Just because someone hasn't performed an autopsy on one, doesn't mean all of their aquired knowledge should be discarded. It depends on how you're looking at it. If you're viewing it through a historical lense, I think it's possible. I have a Masters in history, but I didn't fight in the Civil War.
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 FYI folks.......... EXPERT : having, involving, or displaying special skill or knowledge derived from training or experience : one with the special skill or knowledge representing mastery of a particular subject : to serve as an expert So....Janice Carter would be considered an expert???
Guest baboonpete Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 I think if someone is extremely well versed in the bigfoot phenomenon, they could absolutely rise to the level of expert. Just because someone hasn't performed an autopsy on one, doesn't mean all of their aquired knowledge should be discarded. It depends on how you're looking at it. If you're viewing it through a historical lense, I think it's possible. I have a Masters in history, but I didn't fight in the Civil War. which would make you well versed in the version of the history told by the winner, not what necessarily happened.
Guest thermalman Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) Who's Janice Carter? BTW, the definition of expert I quoted came from websters. Edited October 12, 2012 by thermalman
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 I think if someone is extremely well versed in the bigfoot phenomenon, they could absolutely rise to the level of expert. Just because someone hasn't performed an autopsy on one, doesn't mean all of their aquired knowledge should be discarded. It depends on how you're looking at it. If you're viewing it through a historical lense, I think it's possible. I have a Masters in history, but I didn't fight in the Civil War. As you so rightly point out, expertise is a matter of effort and knowledge, not formal education. A diploma may imply expertise (or at least competence) in a topic, but that is not guaranteed. Likewise the lack of a diploma does not imply lack of expertise. This conflation of expertise with formal education is further evidence of the intellectual contempt that many academics (including Scientists) feel towards those they consider their mental inferiors.
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 I would say someone could be an expert in "The folklore/world of bigfoot." However, I would disagree that a person has the ability to be deemed an expert on the (mythical) creature known as bigfoot. Tell me their diet? man or ape? sleeping habits? solitary? genetic makeup? mindspeak? taste for garlic? eat or bury the dead? language? All we have are stories.
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 As you so rightly point out, expertise is a matter of effort and knowledge, not formal education. A diploma may imply expertise (or at least competence) in a topic, but that is not guaranteed. Likewise the lack of a diploma does not imply lack of expertise. This conflation of expertise with formal education is further evidence of the intellectual contempt that many academics (including Scientists) feel towards those they consider their mental inferiors. I think in any Scientific field formal education has to precede you becoming an expert, effort and knowledge are what get you there and help define you within your field of expertise. Without this formal education (rightly or wrongly) you are just another Joe who happens to be very knowledgeable about your given subject. I am not a surgeon therefore you would not choose to have me remove your appendix whether I could prove a wealth of knowledge in that respect. I may have some interesting concepts with regard to quantum theory but as I have no formal qualifications in quantum physics I would not be listened to by the Scientific community and rightly so in my mind. As I said before most folk if inclined could go out and get themselves a diploma not all could carry on after that and see out earning the right to call themselves a Dr.
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) Sorry, but that's just a variant "appeal to authority". Facts in that view are only facts when an "authorized fact finder" discloses them, which is logically absurd. Amature scientist are as old as science itself, and have made many important discoveries. http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/sciencetech/the-5-most-important-amateur-scientists/940 http://news.discovery.com/space/astronomys-amateurs-a-boon-for-science.html http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Space/story?id=8221167&page=1#.UHgXdWf5OSo http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/orchid/amateurs.html http://redroom.com/member/ivory-madison/blog/the-amateur-scientist-who-discovered-snowflakes-and-how-he-inspired-catwom http://www.amazon.com/Doesnt-Take-Rocket-Scientist-Amateurs/dp/047141431X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1350048098&sr=1-1&keywords=it+doesn%27t+take+a+rocket+scientist+great+amateurs+of+science http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_de_Fermat In certain, select cases (such as medicine) we require proof of competency and sometimes as part of that proof we require the sheepskin, but that is not a mandatory requirement in all cases. Edited October 12, 2012 by Mulder
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 So many big foot experts so many unproven big foot facts.
Guest baboonpete Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 So many big foot experts so many unproven big foot facts. ^^That. Is why there are NO bf experts.
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 Let's take this from the practical perspective... Whom would you turn to to learn more about BF? Someone with years, sometimes decades of field research time like John Green, Derek, Rick, Stan, et al or who has used existing scientific training to expertly analyze BF evidence like Dr Meldrum et al. or would you turn to some random JimmyJoeBubbaBob, or worse, to some Keyboard Kommando Skeptic? I know who I'd choose, and I know who reasonable people would choose. ^^That. Is why there are NO bf experts. Still not true.
Guest Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 First of all - the only time I ever see the words "Bigfoot Expert" - it is in relation to a television program. That is a decision by the production or television company and the people involved barely get a say in how their names are spelled.. Secondly - the only other time this "Bigfoot Expert" is used - is in a way which is meant as a slam. C'mon lets just all be honest about this one. Why do I say this? Because in all of my years of this - and being involved in internet forums about the topic I have NEVER once seen any researcher - well known or not - come into a forum or start a post or topic (or be a guest on a radio program or anything else) with "Hi, my name is, so and so, and I am a Bigfoot Expert". If I am wrong, I would like to be directed to the post or statement. Thanks I would say this is just my 2 cents - but I'm not sure it even amounts to that.
Recommended Posts