America's Expertise Crisis: Losing Faith In Knowledge

In his article, Tom Nichols explores the growing phenomenon of disdain for expertise in America. He argues that the rejection of expertise has become a symbol of demonstrating autonomy and a mechanism of protecting the fragile ego of the American people, particularly regarding issues like public policy. Nichols highlights how informed disagreements have devolved into angry, emotion-fuelled shouting matches, and how feelings and opinions have supplanted facts and knowledge in critical public policy debates. This trend is fuelled by the abundance of information available online, with people embracing the idea that they can know as much about government and public policy as experts. Nichols warns that if trust in experts dissipates, expertise will serve the interests of the highest bidder rather than the public interest, endangering democracy itself.

The rejection of expertise as a symbol of autonomy

In recent years, the rejection of expertise has become a symbol of demonstrating autonomy for Americans. This phenomenon is not limited to a general scepticism towards experts but extends to a dismissal of established knowledge and a collapse of the division between professionals and laypeople. This trend is particularly evident in public policy debates, where feelings and opinions have superseded facts and knowledge. The rejection of expertise is driven by a desire to assert independence from "nefarious elites" and protect fragile egos from being proven wrong.

This shift has significant implications for democratic discourse, as informed and principled arguments are giving way to angry shouting matches. The public's mistrust of experts is fuelled by a perception that experts are "elites" who act in their self-interest rather than the public interest. However, this rejection of expertise is problematic because a modern society relies on a social division of labour, with individuals specialising in different fields. The rejection of expertise can lead to a breakdown of trust between experts and laypeople, resulting in a decline of democracy and the corruption of expertise.

The rise of the internet and easy access to information has also contributed to this trend. While the internet provides an abundance of information, it does little to help individuals navigate the vast amount of content and distinguish reliable sources from misleading or false ones. As a result, people often rely on superficial facts and stray information instead of seeking out expert opinions.

Furthermore, the problem is exacerbated by the presence of self-proclaimed "experts" who overestimate their competence and spread misinformation. This Dunning-Kruger effect, where individuals with limited skills or knowledge have an inflated sense of their abilities, hinders constructive discourse and makes it challenging for genuine experts to be heard.

To restore trust in expertise, both citizens and experts have roles to play. Citizens need to recognise the value of expertise and accept that democracy entails informed decision-making. Experts, on the other hand, must remember that they serve the public and remain transparent, accountable, and self-critical.

The death of principled, informed arguments

In his article, Tom Nichols laments the death of principled, informed arguments, which have been replaced by angry shouting matches. This shift has significant implications for democracy and the role of experts in society. Nichols, a professor himself, acknowledges that Americans have historically been sceptical of intellectuals and experts. However, he argues that the current rejection of expertise goes beyond this traditional distaste.

Nichols cites examples of Americans expressing strong views on foreign policy issues, such as military intervention in Ukraine, without having a basic understanding of geography or the situation at hand. He also mentions a poll where a significant number of respondents supported bombing Agrabah, a fictional country from the Disney film "Aladdin". These incidents illustrate how people's ignorance on certain topics no longer prevents them from having and expressing strong opinions.

This trend is concerning because it indicates that Americans increasingly see ignorance as a virtue. Rejecting expert advice is seen as a way to assert autonomy and independence from "nefarious elites". Nichols worries that this is not just a matter of scepticism towards experts but a collapse of the ideal of expertise itself. He fears that expertise will no longer serve the public interest but instead be influenced by those with power and money.

The availability of information on the internet has also contributed to this shift. While the internet provides access to a wealth of knowledge, it has also led to a collapse in communication between experts and laypeople. Anyone can now access information with a simple online search, giving the illusion of expertise. However, this information is often unverified and can be misleading, contributing to the spread of misinformation and conspiracy theories.

Nichols highlights the importance of metacognition, or the ability to recognise one's own cognitive processes and limitations. He argues that experts are more likely to acknowledge their mistakes and seek to correct them, while non-experts tend to overestimate their competence and are less open to learning. This dynamic further exacerbates the divide between experts and laypeople.

To restore trust in expertise, Nichols suggests that both citizens and experts have a role to play. Citizens need to educate themselves and understand that democracy entails political equality, not the equality of all opinions regardless of logic or evidence. Experts, on the other hand, must remember that they serve democratic society and should be transparent and accountable for their mistakes.

The role of the internet in the death of expertise

The internet has played a significant role in the death of expertise in America. While it is not the primary cause, it has accelerated the collapse of communication between experts and laypeople. The internet offers an apparent shortcut to knowledge, allowing individuals to access information with a simple search but doing little to help them judge the provenance or reputability of the source.

This has led to a situation where people are increasingly turning to Google, Wikipedia, and blogs for information, rather than seeking out the expertise of professionals. The internet has become a giant repository of information, where anyone can post anything, and it can be challenging to separate reliable sources from misleading or false ones. This has resulted in a collapse of the division between professionals and laypeople, with individuals now believing that they can access the same information as experts and that their opinions are just as valid.

The internet has also contributed to the spread of conspiracy theories, which are easily accessible and shared online. These theories often circulate in the wake of collective traumas, such as the 9/11 attacks, and can undermine democratic discourse. They are unfalsifiable, as experts who contradict them are seen as part of the conspiracy.

While the internet has made information more accessible, it has also contributed to the death of expertise by making it easier for individuals to find and share information that confirms their existing biases and beliefs. This has further polarised debates and made it more difficult for experts to communicate their knowledge and advice effectively.

In conclusion, while the internet is not solely responsible for the death of expertise, it has played a significant role in undermining the authority of experts and contributing to the spread of misinformation and polarisation in America.

The absence of metacognition

However, in modern American society, there is a growing trend of individuals lacking this metacognitive ability, which leads to a dangerous overestimation of their own knowledge and abilities. This phenomenon is known as the Dunning-Kruger effect, where those with limited skills or competence in a particular area are overly confident in their expertise. As a result, they are unable to recognise their mistakes and are resistant to learning from experts or acknowledging their authority.

The rejection of expert advice is often fuelled by a desire for autonomy and a need to protect fragile egos. Individuals would rather assert their independence and dismiss expert opinions than admit their ignorance or fallibility. This dynamic is particularly prevalent in discussions about public policy, where Americans increasingly view ignorance as a virtue. They conflate rejection of expertise with a demonstration of freedom from "nefarious elites".

The consequence of this absence of metacognition is a breakdown in the social division of labour, which is essential for a functioning modern society. Specialisation and expertise are crucial for progress, but when laypeople refuse to acknowledge the value of experts, democracy itself is threatened.

To restore faith in expertise, it is essential to address this lack of metacognition. Individuals must develop the self-awareness to recognise their limitations and the humility to accept that experts possess valuable knowledge and skills that they do not. Only then can productive conversations between citizens and experts take place, fostering mutual respect and trust.

The presence of confirmation bias

Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek out information that corroborates what individuals already believe. This is a major problem for experts, who must grapple with this hazard regularly. Scientists and researchers are well-informed about confirmation bias and constantly check for it. However, outside the realm of scholarly articles and peer reviews, arguments among ordinary citizens lack a mechanism for external review or accountability. This leads to the coming and going of facts as people find them convenient, making opinions and arguments "unfalsifiable and intellectual progress impossible".

Conspiracy theories are circulated and believed because they provide context and meaning to frightening events. In societies that have suffered collective traumas, they become a mechanism for undermining the interpersonal discourse on which democracy depends. Conspiracy theories feed themselves by being unfalsifiable; when experts contradict them, they are seen as part of the conspiracy.

A 2015 study by scholars at Ohio State University found that when exposed to scientific research that challenged their views, both liberals and conservatives reacted by doubting the science rather than themselves. This demonstrates the powerful influence of confirmation bias in shaping public opinion and the challenges experts face in communicating their knowledge effectively.

Confirmation bias is a significant obstacle to overcoming the death of expertise and restoring the symbiotic relationship between ordinary citizens and intellectual elites in America.

Frequently asked questions