We, the learned

[enders_shadow]

It is a very good thing my friends, that I am not running for office.
The following statement would kill any hopes I ever had of that:

Comments

[johnny9fingers]

I would like to disagree with you, but find it difficult given the average person in our western democracies.

Nevertheless, Jeff is an informed person, and he and I disagree often, and each of us considers ourselves conservative. So, as you say, there's no win even there.

In human terms we must make the best of a bad job, and include the uninvolved: mitigated by the fact that the folk who are generally elected to represent us will be on the way to becoming expert by dint of their situation; and the electorate itself becomes relatively unimportant in this process. (There are exceptions, of course: the Palins and Bachmans of ths world do a lot of damage, as do single issue pressure groups.)

You do seem to be arguing towards some sort of platonic philosopher-king, or at least a senate/parliament composed of experts, somewhat like the UK's House of Lords. Which I find surprising given your previous positions.

[gunslnger]

That is why a republic is superior to a democracy. But that doesn't mean that an oligarchy of experts is better. The best government is the one that governs the least.

The basic logic flaw with your suggestion of a rigorous test is that someone has to create it. It's the same problem we have now with people voting themselves money.

[policraticus]

Rrriiight....

::backs slowly away::

[enders_shadow]

good job engaging the topic! what a respectable interlocutor you are....

[pastorlenny]

Knowledge and moral vision are two different things.

[rimpala]

yup

[enders_shadow]

You mean how for centuries people practiced slavery *knowing* that it was permitted by God?

[pastorlenny]

No, what I meant was that knowledge and moral vision are two different things.

[enders_shadow]

You realize we currently have people in office who *defer to those more knowledgeable in the field* right?

You may despise Paul Krugman, but do you admit he is an economic expert?
I may disagree with Milton Freedman, but it would be a denial of reality to say the man is not versed in economics.

Obama may defer to Krugman (and other established economists) while Romney or whoever the hell may have defered to Freedman. There's no reason for Krugman and any other expert to conflict--but if it happens, as any experts may conflict, a learned judge must judge between them--in this case, the person asking for info from experts.

If the expert on healthcare says X and expert on childcare says not X, well, whoever is asking these experts for opinions needs to decide who he will accept.

There are no experts that tell you the world is 6000 years old. Those are charlatans. Those people need to get the hell out of my congress.

[enders_shadow]

Wait, are we not permitting for false experts?

Not everyone who claims to be something is.