2009/5/15 John Mikes <jami...@gmail.com>:
> I agree halfway with you and expected something (maybe more).
> Do you mean "the others" are zombies? not ME (you, etc. 1st pers).
I don't think others are zombies, but it is interesting nevertheless
to consider the possibility.
> I take it one step further, the "fun" (I agree) includes a satisfaction that
> "here is a bunch of really smart guys and I can tell them something in their
> profession they may respond to - even if I am outside of their learned
> profession" - which is not so 'practical'. Mental narcissism?
Yes, on some mailing lists people try to score "points" and show how
smart they are but on this one, that doesn't seem to happen so much.
> Somebody made an 'expert' list, collecting opinions for open concepts in a
> statistical evaluation of what the majority of "experts" think. Of course I
> objected: scientific identification is NO democratic voting matter, if 100
> so called 'experts' voice an opinion I may still represent the "right" one
> in a single-vote different position.
That's true, but scientific consensus must count for *something*. If I
have no idea about a subject it is more likely I will get the right
answer from an expert than from a random person. But of course,
experts cannot always be right, and historically many things that
scientists have believed even unanimously have turned out to be wrong.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at