Originally Posted by Max Raker
Well...I don't really agree with you on Suzzer.
Lolz...my understanding of a TON of subjects is at this level. Not really something I'm ashamed of.
I've seen you make plenty of posts that demonstrate that you wouldn't fall into this category. Like if someone made an economic post explaining some concept but screwed up some detail, I would expect you would have a reasonably good chance of finding it (if you were motivated to find it, of course).
You strike me as a lot more intellectually curious and capable of critical thinking to have that little of a level of understanding on a lot of basic subjects, though. I'd be shocked if that was the case. For advanced subjects and non-mainstream subjects, I'd figure you would defer more to people with more knowledge, but you at least would be able to understand your limitations in the subject. And you'd be able to understand if there was some level of debate about various subjects among mainstream subject matter experts and be able to figure out who would be best to trust (other than sort by number of experts on each area).
If I'm wrong about how you think about things like this, I'd be surprised.
An easy analogy would be arguments about sports. Say a team goes for it on 4th down at the end of a game. You have a couple different levels of sports fans:
Casual Sports Fan: What is the conventional wisdom/what do the commentators say? Parrot that.
** This is where I put suzzer's thought processes on politics/economics.
Slightly More Discerning Fan: Bellichick is one of the best coaches in the game, so chances are if someone is saying he made a huge mistake, he probably didn't, so at worst he made a minor mistake.
** Can't think of any examples off the top of my head on here that fits this profile. Suzzer sometimes reaches this level.
Non-expert, but with solid fundamental understanding: You might understand how the concept of making the 4th down decision would work, but have no idea what the values of the variables might be (what are the odds of making it, what are the odds of the other team winning if you make it/don't make it), but if you did, you'd be able to figure it out, and would rely on experts to help you figure out these values.
** This is where I would put you on many subjects where you rely on experts.
Expert opinion: Knows enough to estimate unknown variables, how to make the decision, although may disagree with other experts on what those values for the variables may be.
** Where I would put expert professional economists.
Does this make sense?