| Author |
Message |
|
Roy Robinson Stewart
|
 Posted: Thu 15 Nov, 2007 10:46 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Being an expert and being recognised as an expert is not the same thing, so we shouldn't assume that the set of experts in a subject is identical to the set of recognised or officially qualified experts, or that the definition of an expert is one who is recognised as such.
The question was about what it takes to actually be an expert, not about what publicly recognised credentials label one as an expert.
When it comes to swordfighting, it seems likely that there would be some surprises if the matter were put to a real test. . . some officially sanctioned experts might fail to live up to expectations, while some beginners or unqualified persons might find that they shine when put to the test, due to natural ability or other factors, like a superior training regime.
Of course we wouldn't expect that to be the norm
.
|
|
  |
 |
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Nov, 2007 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Roy Robinson Stewart wrote: | Being an expert and being recognised as an expert is not the same thing, so we shouldn't assume that the set of experts in a subject is identical to the set of recognised or officially qualified experts, or that the definition of an expert is one who is recognised as such.
The question was about what it takes to actually be an expert, not about what publicly recognised credentials label one as an expert.
When it comes to swordfighting, it seems likely that there would be some surprises if the matter were put to a real test. . . some officially sanctioned experts might fail to live up to expectations, while some beginners or unqualified persons might find that they shine when put to the test, due to natural ability or other factors, like a superior training regime.
Of course we wouldn't expect that to be the norm
. |
Very good points: One could re-state the question as what level of knowledge would qualify one to have a peer to peer discussion with a " recognized " expert?
There are levels of expertise I think from being well read on the subject using popular books to then being an actual scholar/researcher having access to primary sources and personal contact/discussion with the writers of the previously mentioned popular books or more scholarly works.
Then there are the top researchers/thinkers finding or creating new ideas and interpretations.
Most of us here are of the well read students of history in general and the history of period and/or modern weapons including military history and tactics: Compared to the general public we are very much experts and we also the main " audience " that are interested and care about the knowledge/research/theories of the " Top experts ". We are the ones who are going to be buying their books or at least have heated discussions about conflicting theories.  
Between calling oneself an expert and the false modesty of denying all expertise we could qualify as advanced students maybe ?
Another way of defining an expert? Quantity and quality of knowledge in a specific field including competence in applying that knowledge or teaching it ? At the top level creating new knowledge ?
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
 |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic