I'm going to go back to this quote-

> I also have a limited patience dealing with overblown egos by some
> self-appointed "expert" whose opinion is expected to be taken as gospel truth,
> regardless if said "expert" is an armouring or costuming artist of the highest
> quality. I get really pissy when I hear absurd statements about horses and
> riding from someone who's entire collection of online photos consist of him
> posing on a horse with its legs locked in a standing position, wearing
> full-plate and holding sword in a "charge" position.

Again, this quote refers to Jeff (hauptman) and me (Ginevra), although it was not posted on this board.

It makes me question the definition of "expertise", and how someone gets to be an "expert". Many people on this board consider others to be "expert" enough to ask questions of, but what exactly makes an "expert"?

What makes AM a cooking expert? She's a scientist in the real world, but she's an SCA Laurel who flies around to cooking symposiums and lectures. Does that make her an expert?

Bob is (as I understand it) an inventory magager for a large company, yet the Higgins Armoury Museum values his knowledge enough that he's on the schedule giving demos on 15th C. armour. Is he an expert? Is he an expert because of his degree [History], or because of his work at the Higgins?

Jeff makes high enough quality reproduction "stuff" that people are willing to pay real money for it-- enough money so that he does it full time and doesn't have to hold down a "real job". He made the saddle, armour and tack in the above quoted photos, owns the horse, organized the event the photos were taken at, etc-- but because the photos are static shots instead of action shots he is summarily dismissed as a "self appointed "expert"" posing for pictures? If the photos had been action shots, would that lend more credibility to his "opinions"? Jeff is currently making reproduction armour for the Higgins' upcoming exhibition on "The Age of Armour", and appeared in a History Channel program on armour, along with the head Curator of a museum. Does that make him an expert? He has a degree in filmaking, not history, so does that make him a poseur instead of an expert? Where does 18 years of independent research fit in?

Why does anyone believe what Dave Key says when he posts- is it the content of what he says, or the fact that he participates with The White Company and Companie of Saynt George, which gives him the luster of credibility?

I have no degree in anything, yet I have work in several museums and historic sites in the US, France, England and Germany. Does the fact that these institutions depend on my accumulated knowledge make me an "expert"? Would a university degree make me more of an "expert", or does 20 years of independent research and the body of my work transform me from a "costuming artist" to a legitimate "expert" on clothing?

Is Peder an "expert" because he studies full time?

The point I was driving at on the other thread and have continued here is this-What defines an "expert"? Why does anyone with a question ask AM, or Bob, or peder, or Dave or me instead of doing their own research? How do we know whether someone's posts here are a synthesis of facts based on well conducted research, or the "absurd statements" of a "self appointed "expert"?

I've pretty much stopped posting on this board because I no longer feel qualified to do so, not because I don't want to help others. The trouble is, I just don't feel like I know enough to warrant anyone's depending on my knowledge.

Just my fevered, pre-coffee ramblings ....

quote:

---

I've pretty much stopped posting on this board because I no longer feel qualified to do so, not because I don't want to help others. The trouble is, I just don't feel like I know enough to warrant anyone's depending on my knowledge.

---

I think that it would be a shame to loose your input. I find your knowledge, and willingness to share it, to be a great treasure.

I understand your frustration over the comment you have posted. I have never known you to claim to be an expert when you post. I have witnessed an ability to change your opinion based on new information provided by others. You show a willingness to incorporate the viewpoints of others and to truly use it as a learning experience. I value your opinion and your knowledge. I hope that you will not allow the words of a bitter sounding person to keep you from sharing your knowledge with others.

On the issue of what makes an "expert". I have never had much use for the word. Some people are just further along on the learning curve than others. The problem with the term expert is that it denotes a person who has nothing more to learn or who feels they are infallible, neither trait have I witnessed from you. I do know that there are some people's opinions that I value more than others and you fall within that category. I find that you have a far greater knowledge of the subjects you choose to speak on than the vast majority of people. Your opinions are based on a good analysis of the information available to you. Personally, I hope to remain a student for the remainder of my life, never happy with what I currently know and always willing to ask why.

--------------------

Here is my take on it. An expert to me, and it would seem I am in agreement with Mr. Webster, is someone that involves, has, or displays special skills and or knowledge derived from TRAINING (classroom) or EXPERIENCE (field).

A degree only proves that you put in the "chair time". It doesn't mean that you retained the knowledge after the finals were over.

For example: I have a degree in Graphic Design and Communciation design. That does not make me an expert in Art History, I took courses, but that's it. What my piece of paper means is that I know about modern graphic design and have an informed opinion on it. What would make me an expert is how I apply that knowledge in the real world.

Experience and continued research make one an expert, but it is a journey that never ends and continually evolves. Acknowledgement, though demonstration of applied knowledge to other acedemics and peers who have studied the same field or have enough basic knowledge as to what is correct and not and the wisdom to ask when they don't, helps define one as an expert.

Just my opinion, but it seems that too much time is spent caring about the term and those who are not in a position research or experience wise to determine another person's expertise in a given area.

--------------------

I'm a grad student at MIT, and if there are bona fide EKAG™s around, one would think that MIT professors, including those with various fancy prizes etc, would probably qualify. And yet, they aren't always correct, and it is often easier and more enlightening to talk to other students or postdocs than to professors when you are stuck on a problem.

We are all students, it is just that some of us have studied certain topics for a while, and have developed a base of knowledge in those areas that they can supply to other students new to the specific topic.

I usually preface anything I write on a topic to a person who asks with the caveat "What I don't know would fill a warehouse..."

--------------------

please don't stop posting. i'm actually upset that i haven't seen Jeff post in a while. you all are very much appreciated by me aswell as others. do i concider anyone here on this board including myself an expert? no, but i do regard the opinion of some highly, even if i do disagree with some of the things that they ahve said. because i believe that there are many truths and it depends on the way that it's looked at.

the reason that i enjoy chemistry so much is because i hope and pray that in 20 years everything that i know noww will be wrong. more than a hundred years ago the theorry of an atom was a new one not known by many. the atom's structure resembled a plum pudding. today there in a nucleus composed of protrons and nutrons and it is surrounded by shells of electrons with different orbitals in it's valence shell. with this information that i have now i could be an experton on atomic structure. but what of J.J. Thompson? he too was an expert in his day with his plum pudding.

so are there any true experts?

i value your judgements. i also treat this board as sorta my study hall. it's full of first year freshmen that are absorbing all that they can get their hands on. some study and some just want to get the answers from last years midterms. some sophomores that have taken the courses allready and are here to help by pushing you in the right direction. i'm sure that there some took the course with different proffesors who taught the same course differently (like that one prof that had such compulsive neatness that it frightened me). now as feshmen, do you just acept what is told as gospel or do you do your own studying to make sure the info is right?

i think that ths is the crux of it. this board should be used as a tool for further learning. are people willing to do that? can this inspire them to go out and read up on the subject and actually eperiment in the feild?

my God is it almost 5 in the a.m.? wow!

i'm going to bed now. sorry if i rambled.

daniel

--------------------

Db

I am certainly willing to look at someone's areas of study, time in grade so to speak, and credit that they can speak with authority on a subject. Come to me calling yourself an "expert" and I will run the other way. Too many good things have been ruined in our world by self-proclaimed experts.

Brenna

--------------------

on who is an expert:

"expert" is a term that is assigned to you by others.

I dont consider myself a cooking "expert". Sure, Iknow lots about medieval food, and French food in particular, but "expert"?

I've never heard anyone here call THEMSELVES an expert. So we're not exactly "self proclaimed", are we?

Someone asks a question. we all chime in with what we've read (the good ones give sources ). It is up to the QUESTIONER to decide if they accept the evidence or not.

Gwen and I dont always disagree on the conclusions of the evidence. Does that make one more expert than the other? hardly! Our different backgrounds allow us to approach the same question from different angles, and that's cool.

I'm sorry, but anyone who gets all bent out of shape because they feel conclusions are being crammed down their throats has several options:

1. do their own reading and come up with their own conclusions
2. say "thank you very much but I come up with a different conclusion/dont buy it" and give reasons (with sources) for it
3. complain that big meanies are imposing misinformation on them
4. dont even bother asking and procede ahead with their own store of knowledge, never knowing if it is supported by other viewpoints.

as Gwen said, I'm a scientist. I spend every day producing data, which must then stand up to the scrutiny of my collegues, as well as against a concordance of previous literature. Theres a lot of literature out there....I would MUCH rather have my collegues point out possible flaws now as opposed to the patent lawyers for the competition doing it!

Living History is similar....I draw a conclusion, say, about the use of orange in 15th century cuisine. Gwens reading suggests something different. We talk about it and try and make a conclusion that agrees with ALL the evidence. Sometimes we actually succeed .

So who's an expert? not me!

--AM

--------------------

In the last year (oh my God, has it really been that long now?), I have learned sooooo much through this BB. The input by so many of you has directed me to "proper" research material (ie. what books to read/avoid). To loose anyones thoughts/opinions on one of their more knowledgable subjects would be devastating.

My own personal knowledge is a smattering of this and that (usually enough to help me find the answers, but more often enough to get me in trouble). I try to ask for starting points in research, rather than just asking for someone else just to hand over all of their hard gained knowledge (but sometimes that shameless question needs to be asked--just to know if the more appropriate one is worth the time/effort).

I don't think we need anyone who's an "expert" (self-proclaimed or otherwise), just reasonably intelligent, enlightened people offering help or a point in the proper direction.

Just my not so humble opinion

Alasdair

The only thing I've ever claimed to be an expert in is BS!

--------------------

In my dealings as an art historian in training, I have had the privilege of working with some excellent and well-respected professors, some with 30 years of research under their belts, but for the most part they are not afraid to admit the limits of their knowledge. No one involved in the process of intellectual discovery, gets very far if they can't deal with this, and everyone I know in my field is pretty well frustrated both with the state of their own knowledge, and with the lack of sound information in the field in general.

What has no useful place in any productive field of inquiry, is the attitude that we must actively trash other peoples' attempts at knowledge in order to give our own efforts some stature. In academia, people with that sort of attitude occasionally get PhDs, but they tend not to get jobs. In a hobbyist field, especially with the internet involved, you just have to develop a thick skin against blowhard criticism, and perhaps remember what Eleanor Roosevelt said: Nobody can make you feel inferior without your consent.

I realized that I can handle my scholarship being put under fire, but a unprovoked personal attack on me or my husband rocks my world. I can and should be able to back up my research based assertions with facts, but how can I respond to the accusation of being an egotist spouting absurd statements? (That's a rhetorical question).

Because of our business and reenactment group, we are very visible. We are thankful that both are well regarded by many people, and we have worked consistently and diligently to earn our friends, clients and colleagues’ respect. While I won’t deny that we can be difficult in a “temperamental artist” sort of way, those of you who know us personally understand our fundamental desire to be decent, honest, helpful and compassionate human beings. That aside, I am unfortunately learning that being visible makes us easy targets for any trash hurled in our direction. I forget to look at what’s being hurled while I’m ducking for cover.

Thinking about it rationally, I realized that JK is right- trashing other people and their work is non productive and has no place here. Beside that it is childish, petty and very, very small. Sometime we miss the obvious when emotion, not logic, is involved.

I genuinely appreciate the insights you’ve all given me, and I hope that I’ll be able to be more objective the next time a salvo like this comes in. Thanks.

quote:

---

I can and should be able to back up my research based assertions with facts, but how can I respond to the accusation of being an egotist spouting absurd statements? (That's a rhetorical question).

---

Perhaps it was a rhetorical question but if you really think about it, you respond to it the same way you do scholarship being put under fire: simply provide documentation that can show the attacker they were wrong. Most of the members of this board (you included, I have seen it ) can toss out references, documentation, sources, etc for everything they do or research--just do the same for the situation you referenced above.

I'm sure we all understand that at times we, our activties, assertions, research abilities or areas of knowledge will come under attack from someone for various reasons. Either fire back a salvo with documentation to prove them wrong or ignore it. I can understand being hurt BUT isn't it better to be the bigger person and educate the individual about the error of their judgement. Post some pictures of what your husband really can do with his horse in armour and the situation goes away.

The best way to quiet someone down is to prove their assertions are in error.

Brenna

--------------------

There you go !

You should have just posted that with a rasberry face!

[ 09-18-2001: Message edited by: Seigneur de Leon ]

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ginevra:
Why does anyone believe what Dave Key says when he posts- is it the content of what he says, or the fact that he participates with The White Company and Companie of Saynt George, which gives him the luster of credibility?

---

Gwen ,

Haven't read the rest of all of this bar cursory scan ... but a few thoughts

1. Good question ... I'd hope that no-one believes me, but I'd hope they're convinced by my arguements.

2. I've been wrong, and will be wrong and I hope that I'll be corrected (nicely please!)

3. I've been accused of being egotistical, arrogant, etc etc and sometimes they've been wrong ... seriously though I've found most rants of that sort are the rants of those whose toys have been taken away. Difficult if not impossible not to take it personally, I certainly did a few years ago. However best forgotten and do wht others have advised, be as polite as is humanly possible and ask the 'attacker' to help you by explaining the error of your ways. hey'll either put up (which is good as it can be refuted, or allow you to be corrected magnamously) or shut up.

4. Well I appreciate your thoughts ... so there

Even these so called "Experts" make mistakes and (as I'm sure most of you will agree) this BB is a SUPERB resource but it can't be 100% Gospel truth

it sound to me like this rant is the result iof someone taking anothers opiinion at face value, perhaps even second hand, and didn't bother to check up on it!"

I value very much what I read on this BB, but I always try and Confirm the "facts" before useing them!

As my Dad always says "Measure Thrice, Cut only once"

[ 09-29-2001: Message edited by: Caliburnus[UK] ]

--------------------