Reasons for optimism

I think my education was interesting.

My quality academy nun told our whole class that pleasure in marriage was a mortal sin.

That was part of my blotto confusion some time later. I got over it.

Be careful what you wish for.

A couple of excerpts from a Wapo article entitled "Enough with the Scandinavians already:"



https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/10/enough-with-the-scandinavians-already/

I was a little katlik boy for a spell, but I never got the benefit (if that's what it is) of attending catholic schools because I was excommunicated when I was 8 years old.

They might have kept me out of prison, who knows? Aww, well, that's all right. Those penguins scared the crap out of me anyway. Who needs them?

You know, one of my biggest regrets in life is that I did not do more of exactly that.

I flitted from field to field, from studying one thing, learning another, getting a job thanks to the latter ... only to move on to what seemed like a more interesting line of work, then switching from that to another pursuit, and in the course of all of that absorbing knowledge about whatever subject had my primary attention at the time, being an information junkie and all.

The result? I know a little about a lot of things. But I don't know a lot about any one single thing. Or where I did, it's now out of date, etc. I can do a bunch of stuff - but I'm not excellent in any one thing.

I'm not saying that your quote doesn't have a point at all. Take the field of political science, where PhDs now tend to be routed into insanely narrow research endeavours, usually as part of large teams in which no one person gets to take on more than one bolt or screw of the whole. And yet, or perhaps exactly because of that -- for all its achievements in adhering more and more to the standards of a hard science (quantifiability, replicability, etc) -- the discipline largely failed to grasp or anticipate most of the sensational political developments currently rocking the world. (I thought this very short post about that was interesting.)

But personally? As fashionable as it is to bash experts and specialists now, I feel like they're more valuable than ever.

The old days of traditional news hierarchies were flawed and limited. It's a luxury to be able to access an unprecedented wealth of news, information and data from around the world and from all parts of the ideological spectrum, with just a few taps or clicks. But on the flipside,
opinions seem more than ever a dime a dozen. From Facebook and Twitter where everyone fancies themselves a pundit, to blog sites fueling partisan passions, to a glut of clickbaity opinion pieces in the papers, to TV's lazy reliance on talking heads whose blowharding will fill the 24/7 airtime at much less cost or effort than investigative reporting, we're just flooded by a continuous stream of half-baked, semi-informed opinionating like -- well -- mine.

If I had spent my life studying, I don't know, the South-Ossetians or Gagauzians, chances are nobody would be interested in my opinion for most of my life ... but that one time that something's up in South-Ossetia or Gagauzia, damn, I'd actually have some unique insight to contribute. Instead of just one more guy's opinion that's somewhat well-informed, but really no more than that of a million others.

I enjoyed you lament, nimh. Very entertaining and well-written. But it's just another typical case of "the grass is always greener," I suspect.

The only person who needs to approve of, or benefit from, your opinion is you, yourself. You don't seem like the type who would ever be fulfilled by immersing yourself in obscure, esoteric detail.

"Not entirely due"? That's fine. The point still stands even if it's just "largely due" to them.

I bookmarked the VoxEU piece by the researchers though, so thanks for that, I'll read it. Just going on the WaPo column's summary though, it seems counterintuitive to pit the model of the "more cuddly Nordic societies" against "the cut-throat capitalist model" on the basis that the former mitigates against technological innovation, while the latter boosts it. The Nordic countries have not exactly been slouches when it comes to technological innovation. For such small countries, they've achieved more than their share.

Aw. That's an extremely kind response. Thank you.

I get you. I once knew about two thousand latin names of plants and a varying amount about them. Just today I was trying to remember the latin name for a certain ash tree. I got it but my reception was slow.

Let's say that I was an expert for some minutes of time.

Donald Trump - "I had an uncle, he was a great nuclear physicist. Wow he was great, just great. Believe me. Maybe the greatest nuclear physicist ever. Smart. So smart. He invented the atom."

Donald Trump - "I love Jesus. Incredible guy. Isn't he? Amazing. I love religion. I've had good people look into it. Good people. The best. And they said, "You're right, Mr President, Jesus was amazing". I'm pretty smart about these things. I just wish I could have met the guy. I think he'd like me. I'm pretty sure that he'd tell you lying media people that he likes me. But you won't say that in your lying media. But the people know. Americans know, believe me - they know. They know I wouldn't be President if Jesus hadn't cast His ballot for me."

yes, I feel much more optimistic now.

Mid spring this coming year. Beautiful sunny day in DC. Trump is to give a speech in front of the White House. It's been the media frenzy of the prior week. Word has leaked out by unnamed sources near to The President that this would be the most important speech The President has ever given. This is big. Gigantic. The feed camera frames the beautiful door against the classic white structure, sidewalk coming down to the camera position. the grass on either side as green as a lawn in a tourism brochure. And standing on either side of the sidewalk near the doors, six secret service agents detailed to the White House, three on each side, backs to the camera, in white uniforms tight around the waist, with short skirts and all the 6' tall agents in heels. Their hair is in ponytails going down to mid-back, all cut the same and all with the same shape. But all in different hair colors. The red head is compelling. They turn, in unison, sideways to the camera. They lift up long golden trumpets of the sort you saw in those Goldwyn films, with
long triangular banners hanging down in purple with a large golden "T" in the center. They raise to 45 degrees crossing each other side to side making a golden colonade with a high roof. They all sound their beautiful royal note. The WH door opens and President Trump, smiling, walks under his collonade towards the camera. He stops at the podium, smiling. Behind him, through the magic of Computer Assisted Graphics, the SS agent's trumpets have morphed to become AK 47s, resting jauntily across those compelling and relaxed hips.

Swamp Draining, episode 153 - It takes an unusually honest man to get this challenging task done.
http://nyti.ms/2goI5TK

Yes, if you are a billionaire you can afford to give surf's the finger. Most will run out of money and give up. Our vaunted legal system that is fair for all is fairer for the guy that can outlast the opposition monetarily. If they lose in a lower court they just go to the next higher one.

How in hell can the guy who says 'surf's' spell 'vaunted'???

Like you, I'm far more of a generalist than a specialist in any sphere. In my case, that seems a consequence of several factors: I never thought to take some singular path in order to amass income or to create a stable future; my intellectual interests were numerous and felt I would cheat myself with a singular direction; and as always, chance (had I encountered an inspiring mentor in some unique area, perhaps I would have specialized). Still, like you again, I recognize the value of the specialist or expert to the community (your child's surgeon or the guy who builds a bridge that doesn't collapse or the men and women who can put a lander on Mars that keeps working for years or the guy who figured out that the rates of disease and infection in London were unusually high near the river and the wastes being dumped in that river were likely responsible, etc etc).

But negative ideas about expertise (and learning/education or the intellectual life) has a long history in the US (and not only the US). And lots of this is understandable. A bright child born into a poor family in Appalachia would feel justified in resenting the educational and economic advantages of another child born into a wealthy family in New York City. Or simply because of the inequality in talents and intelligence handed out to each of us at birth.

But in the present, there are other significant factors which promote a derogation of expertise and knowledge gained by experts. Perhaps the classic example is how tobacco companies set out very purposefully to a propaganda project designed to make citizens doubt scientific finding on the health consequences of smoking, a tactic duplicated by energy industries on the science of climate warming.

From some combination of all those factors above, we got Sarah Palin and Donald Trump.

Even though expertise acheived by training and experience AND integrity are NOT necessarily conjoined traits ( and we recognize that and have to expose and punish those who attempt to use their expertise only for their own benefit). we cannot afford, since the days of the Bush II regime, to continue this "war on applied sciences and learning".
Weve got almost an entire political party dedicated to being against knowledge. And that all knowledge is arbitrary, and the US Supreme Court is merely a political tool.

We are fucked in the head if this continues.

I know. I was trying to be polite in that last post while giving some history. But I don't feel polite about this at all. It is one of the most serious threats to America as a democracy and as a technical leader, not to mention as a collective of relatively sane people. I'm aghast at what is happening. Now, more than ever with Trump and the coterie of nutballs around him.

I've done a number of different, very disparate things in my life, and have had extensive tastes of various specializations, including carrier aviation, academic life and simply managing a variety of organizations. These ranged from fighter squadrons, to large naval vessels to a variety of professional service corporations performing Architect/engineering, construction and structural engineering services; nuclear engineering & waste disposal; and now environmental engineering & remediation services. I've seen some common elements in all of these and ,as well, some unique, non-transferable elements. That in itself is an illuminating process.

I've learned that specialists can often (not always) become proficient generalists, but the reverse is exceedingly rare. A deep grounding in some discipline often appears to be a necessary precursor for wise endeavor in other fields.

I've also learned that the educated and professional classes are still human beings and are still dominated by all the contradictions and appetites of our common human nature. Education and experience are no guarantee of wisdom or proficiency.

In particular, those in academic pursuits, often less experienced in the complexities and give and take of the real world, can be far more intolerant and self-righteous than the rest of us. Indeed I have come to be mistrustful of the whole lot. "Sayer's Law" comes to mind ....( "Academic disputes are so vicious and bitter precisely because the stakes are so low.") In this context it is worth remembering that the absurd contradictions and complexities of the Obama Care law (that no one in the Administration actiually read) were the creation of a bunch of academics.

Who needs prison reform when you have a sister like that educating you?