Quote:
Originally Posted by Rococo
No one's position is unassailable. In areas where questions of legal strategy intersect with business dynamics (e.g., Will the defendant settle for more if we take this case all the way to the courthouse steps?), non-lawyers often have a lot of add, and their instincts may even be superior to the instincts of a lot of lawyers.
With the sort of thing we are discussing (What is the standard for class certification and is the proposed class likely to be certified?), I don't know that I have ever met a non-lawyer whose judgment I would trust over the judgment of a good litigator with subject matter expertise.
Agreed.
My question was more to why it seems to bother you and at least one other lawyer here that anyone might both give deference and yet still hold to some minor disagreement.
We had an instance a few days back where I was very deferential to your view and everything was polite and well discussed and yet the other lawyer who chimed in basically treated it as if some offense since I did not simply abandon my view entirely.
Quote:
I don't see any reason to blindly follow any advice. But I suspect that people who reflexively follow medical device make better medical decisions on balance than people who "do their own research" and take that research heavily into account when making medical decisions.
Everyone is free to have an opinion. I may walk into my cardiologist's office with a lay opinion about whether I need heart surgery. Maybe my opinion will be informed by what I read on medical websites over the previous week. But if my cardiologist disagrees with my opinion, and if the person I go to for a second opinion also disagrees with my opinion, I am going to be pretty quick to change my mind. That's because my conviction in my opinions is highly correlated to whether I know wtf I am talking about. And I don't know much about heart surgery.
Sure from an EV standpoint, following the expert advice as opposed to going against is not going to end well most of the times.
That said what about the situation I speak to specifically.
I can see there is no harm in going against their view. So what, I bought and have in storage masks I don't need, that we will use next time we paint and if they end up being wrong I have protected my family if masks end up in short supply.
Do you specifically set aside that logic and thinking simply because 'the experts said' in a belief that since it is always long term EV to follow the professionals it is therefore always the case you should do without being critical when the EV shifts, as it did with my very insightful purchase?
Could you ever and would you ever detour from such 'expert guidance' in a similar scenario as i did based on my analysis or do you consider yourself more of a conformist on that?
I only ask as many, arguably most, are more the conformist type on that. I did not have one family member who understood or agreed with me buying those masks anyway when the CDC and even Canada's health professionals were not supporting it.
I simply will not put it aside. The next Novel potential Respiratory Pandemic, I will again buy masks early and if it turns out it is not respiratory, so what??? I have masks I don't need.
Do you think you could or would ever make that call against the CDC or other expert advice?