Yes, the internet is an amazing tool, but it’s turned everyone into insufferable self-appointed experts (myself included). It allows people to say crazy, unsubstantiated things, but is it better to “say” and embarrass yourself, or to have never “said” anything at all?
One of the main ways messages were spread before the advent of the internet was through well-funded institutions. These institutions decided who would be heard and who would be not.
One could try and distribute media independently, but it was incredibly rare to attain the same sort reach recognized institutions had. When the internet first emerged, those who were historically not given a voice finally had an outlet to reach a larger audience.
But not all these voices fight against oppression and injustice. Not all these voices are rational, kind, or informed. The internet, coupled with the profit motive, has opened the flood gates for hate speech and misinformation. What people see on the internet, is what serves the financial interests of the platform owners.
Personal Experience Vs Expertise
As someone who believes in Carol Hanisch’s “the personal as political,” it may sound antithetical to tell people not to base their world views on their personal experiences, but the reality is that the theory doesn’t tell us to disregard facts and statistics.
The theory highlights that aggregating “personal/political” experiences give us insight into issues that affect us collectively; that it helps to pay attention to patterns in people’s struggles.
And just as collectivity is a fundamental part of the “personal as political,” collectivity is a fundamental part of Expert Consensus. What is consensus, if not collective?
We Need to Defer to Experts
It’s ok not to know something, or not to have an opinion yet. If you do have an opinion on an issue, even if it’s an “informed” one, don’t act as an authority.
If we come to “informed” opinions by listening to multiple experts who’ve spent years studying, analyzing, and articulating about the issues (and not angry comments online), what makes you think your angry comment is going to do anything?
Point those you disagree with in the right direction and allow them to make their own conclusions. You can do your best to offer explanations and answers, but deferring to experts can help frame the conversation more constructively.
If a person you disagree with refuses to engage with expert consensus, it’s unlikely that you’ll be able to do anything in that moment to help them understand your point of view.
If you really want to change their mind, you’ll have to dedicate a lot of time and patience to breaking down just how “expertise” is formed, and why it’s important to listen to a community of experts as opposed to just one.
Aren’t Experts Wrong Sometimes?
It’s difficult to come up with a perfectly objective system that helps move society forward. Institutions, academics, professionals, etc. have promoted harmful, inaccurate beliefs in the past.
Despite this, the scientific method is one of the best working systems we have. It might not be perfect, but it’s infinitely better than relying on personal experience alone.
Experts have and continue to revise their sentiments as new information comes to light. New voices and perspectives are entering the discussion as well, and we’ve shifted values and priorities to help make sure studies contain less bias.
In any case, we should reserve a bit of space in our discussions for logic. We must acknowledge what our main goal is, because a difference here will not yield any outcome no matter how reliable our sources are.