On Sat, 24 Jan 1998, Robert Neunteufel wrote:
> Experts from different scientific fields are in a high degree
> responsible for the major problems we are confronted with.
> It seems to me, that experts are specialists in their field, who are not
> able to think about the possibly negative effects of their special
> solutions for the social or ecological system.
True for most current experts, but this doesn't mean that Expertocracy per se
is bad, but simply that we currently have the 'wrong' experts in power.
> But we were not successful, as the academic teachers and the
> representatives of industrial companies said, that there was not enough
> time for such unimportant questions.
Wrong experts will teach wrong experts.
> On the other hand, Austria ( a small country in the heart of Europe) is
> the only country I know, where due to a plebiscit a nearly completed
> atomic power plant was not allowed to start operating and no new atomic
> power plants can be constructed.
Obviously, it's easy for the public to be wiser than corporate experts who
only have their vested interests in mind. However, if you consider how
much the same public keeps on polluting and electing anti-green politicians,
you might get a doubt whether it is wise to give power to this public.
> I am quite sceptic, that experts without the necessary responsibility
> can create a better future.
You can't replace the public, but you can replace experts.
> How should those experts be educated and how can they be controlled?
By the 'right' experts.
Greetings,
Chris
___________________________________________________________________________
The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of an expanding bureaucracy.
