(no subject)

[ewt]

What makes someone an expert on something? What distinguishes an expert from an amateur? I'm not just talking about careers here, but areas of interest as well. When is knowledge the only indicator of expertise, and when to skill and good judgement come in?

[Poll #838240]

Comments

[hairyears.livejournal.com]

I would define an expert as satifying the following criteria:

• Knows the subject in depth and in detail, confidently and fluently as a skilled practitioner; and, further, has achieved a level of insight and knowledge of the minute and the obscure that places him in the top 5% of practitioners;
• Other practitioners acknowledge this and seek his or her advice;
• Contributes to discussions by the top experts in his field - we're talking about the Mark Russinovitch or Brian Kernighan of your chosen field, here, people;
• Has made at least some small but original contribution to his that is used by others.

My Origami has become lamentably rusty - although there are probably less than 100 people worldwide who can do two of the folds I have re-mastered - and my MS-Access ubergeekery relates to obsolete software.

There is one other accepted criterion for 'expert' status: published author on the subject. On that basis, I'm not an expert in any of these things!

And yes, I do set the bar rather high: and no, your plumber isn't an expert, he's a skilled and knowledgeable craftsman with the expected competence in his trade. Would a court of law call him as an expert witness? Probably not: they'd call an experienced craftsman who has worked at ground level, at supervisory level, and then as a teacher of others - and even then, they'd look for someone who'd been consulted on or contributed to the accepted teaching texts and safety standards. 'Expert' means more than being good at it and knowing more than I do.

[rzigweid.livejournal.com]

I really cannot find fault in your criteria, with exception of maybe the 5% rule. I also think that this criteria is possibly variable based upon the field. For instance, even a pioneer in a brand new field, might not be considered an expert because of the vast amount of knowledge that remains unknown.

Teaching (both ability and willingness) is another criteria I should think would contribute. It doesn't put someone into the category of expert, but I think not teaching should probably exclude them, even if it is just to one or two other people. Hording knowledge is..bad IMHO.