The opinions of experts in the search for knowledge

Before answering the question, one should always analyse what the question asks bit by bit to avoid confusion. The first thing which made me wonder was how we identify who are experts and who are not. My personal definition of an expert would be a person who mainly concentrates on their main profession in order to help and assist others, using the knowledge they have learnt throughout the years.

But even though the term "expert" is considered a very prestigious title to be called, there are some exceptions where you could be an expert in a profession, but still might not have the same importance to research in society as other experts might have.

At the same time it is important to remember that a person does not necessarily have to be trained in order to become and expert. For example parents, athlete runners or joggers, and weight lifters, are all examples, they might require some skill or background knowledge in order to do them as experts, but it does not necessarily require to be trained in the profession in order to them.

Get quality help now

Marrie pro writer

Verified writer

Proficient in: Knowledge

5 (204)

“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

There are many types of experts in today's society, whether different expert's professions are more important than another, can de discussed. My personal opinion upon different types of experts is they all have some importance and relevance to today's society, and when deciding if some experts are more important than others I would say no, because in my opinion "experts" are given that title because they demonstrate a general understanding of the profession they have.

The problem is, how do we decide upon who are and who are not experts.

The best way is to name different types of experts such as Scientists, they use their knowledge of their profession in order to expand our knowledge of today, for example the famous Albert Einstein who we look up to, discovered E=MC2. His discovery of this magnificent formula is what brought him the title as a genius, and earned him the Noble price in Physics. But even though he made great discoveries it is important to remember some of his assumptions and discoveries were proved incorrect by other scientist like him.

The point is to remember that human beings are fallible and make mistakes, and when experts are in the search for knowledge it is relevant for the context of that time period, since the discoveries might be proved wrong in the future. The next question is then, does one need to have made a famous discovery in order to be given the title "expert". My opinion to this is no, because I would compare those scientists to the work of a doctor. Is a doctor not an expert in what they do?

I think they are, because it requires tremendous training and understanding of the profession as a doctor, in order to complete and for fill those tasks that are required to save other peoples lives in pressured situations. The example I have to relate scientists to doctors is that, doctors also discover new cures to diseases in the world of medicine, as well as pharmaceuticals do, but as scientists and doctors, not all discoveries make them famous and remembered, but they will still be interpreted as experts. The next question would be, do you then need to discover something important or be a life saver in order to be called an expert?

Again my opinion is no, since you could take teachers for example. Teachers are also experts because they are known for their skills in academics, and having the ability to pass on their knowledge to others. This brings me to my final point, people who seek guidance; do they always look up to experts? My answer to this would be yes, for example, students seek guidance from teachers in order to learn, football players seek help from their coaches to learn from their mistakes, religious people seek guidance to priests for advice, and lastly children seek guidance to their parents for advice.

All these examples relate in the way that the people they seek for help, are most likely more skilled in that area of knowledge, they pass on their knowledge from personal experiences in order to help the people, and they are maybe able in the end to make the person see their own mistakes and learn from them. How much is required to be an expert? I feel it is as I mentioned in the above explanation of experts, "a person who mainly concentrates on their main profession in order to help and assist others, using the knowledge they have learnt throughout the years.

" This can be related to parenting, where the parents might have learnt their skills as parents from training or from their parents, which could continue on for many generations. The main thing is that the parents are experts, because they have the ability to teach their children the important things in life, for example teaching their children to eat their vegetables, brush their teeth, or wash their hands, and not to smoke or get into cars with strangers.

Culture also plays a great importance in parenting, since parents from different cultures might teach their children differently. For example some Latin American parents might teach their children that going to church every Sunday is an important thing to remember, whereas Danish parents are not as strict about the importance of attending church. This also shows that religion and culture play a huge role in the upbringing of children by parents. Another thing to remember is Orphans, since they are parentless who do they look up to as their teachers and guidance's.

I think it depends whether the children are at an orphan home or not. For example children at orphan homes would look up to their nuns or teachers, whereas orphans without a home have a harder time. I think they observe their surroundings and see what other people do in order to teach themselves. For example language, the way people act around the streets and communicate with each other. Children at young ages seem to copy their surroundings a lot, which could explain why some children act like their parents, and even grow up to be like them.

There are also totally different perspectives of experts, such as aboriginals, they were known to have a witch doctor in their village that people seek guidance to and advice, and in the aboriginal's eyes, those were their experts. Does that mean that aboriginal witch doctors are experts? Most likely yes. Do the majority of people in the world agree upon this? Most likely not, but I find that in the end it matters not of what people think of who and who are not to be called experts, more if the people who are willing to be called experts, meet the requirements in order to carry this prestigious title.

In some way aboriginal witch doctors and shamans are parental substitutions, since the parents themselves look up to them and teaching their children the same, this shows that the witch doctors and shamans have a more influential and informative role in cultures compared to others. As the title mentions, "in the search for knowledge", but how do experts search for knowledge? The example I have for this is again with scientists. Scientists have created a method in order to see if what they research and experiment with can be proved correct.

What they do is use the Scientific Method. The scientific method is based upon having a hypothesis about what the results will be from the experiment, and then you go on by performing the experiment, gathering results and noting down if the results had any connection to what you wanted to prove. In the end you would write a conclusion and evaluation, where you would include if you proved your hypothesis correct or incorrect, and what variables might have affected the experiment.

And if the experiment proved to be wrong, then the scientist would most likely try again and again until the experiment is a success. There are also other examples such as historians, who investigate the past by either finding evidence or translating old languages in order to better understand the past and the reasons for those events taking place. This is the way I believe experts gather knowledge. To sum up what my opinions are upon experts, one could ask, "can we get knowledge without experts"?

My answer to this would be no, because looking at who are considered experts, it can be seen that most people are considered experts in what they do, so saying we could get by without experts, would be saying that we could gain knowledge without having the human race exist in my opinion. As this is said, I would conclude that the opinions of experts are important in the search for knowledge, because without experts "the human race" we would not be able to gain knowledge, we might be making progress like the cavemen did in their time, where the act of gaining knowledge was most likely pure luck.

To sum everything up, I find that the opinions of experts are very important, because with out their opinions, I find we would not be making any progress in the world of Science, Medicines, academics, or parenting. All of these examples have some relevance and importance to show how the world would be progressing if it were not for them, and many other experts.