Thread by @BrianDunning

I have to say this morning's Twitter convo with a popular IDW figure really blew my mind. We have a number of mutual friends and though we've never met it's always been abundantly clear that he's one of the smartest people you'll ever come across.
(1/7)

So I'm really struggling to wrap my head around why he's embracing and elevating this tired old strawman argument against knowledge, the scientific method, and the expertise we build as a result of it.
(2/7)

Obviously I get the whole IDW/populist/libertarian rejection of authority — which is fine, but the way its adherents often blur the line between *authority* and *expertise* is where the platform starts to fall apart.
(3/7)

I've spent my career (in part) trying to advise people that when life gives you a decision that depends on a field you're not personally fluent in, go with the consensus perspective...
(4/7)

...from the field of people who have spent their lives working in it and building our knowledge base. Maybe you won't always be right, but you will be right far more often than you're wrong.
(5/7)

Much of the tragedy of this past decade that's seen a worldwide rising tide of populism is that it has encouraged people to do the opposite. It panders to those who are intellectually lazy and prefer to make whatever decision panders to their personal bubble of comfort.
(6/7)

It seeks to justify such choices by inventing this narrative that so-called "experts" are all corrupt, my spidey-sense trumps your Ph.D, and behind every scientific finding is an agenda. It is so crucial that we separate our ideologies from our acceptance of reality.
(7/7)