Who is an expert? (was Re: FW: Protect vs Cancel, etc)

CSGnet Archive CSG2015
1

[Martin Taylor 2015.05.01.15.03]

Don't forget that Bill, from time to time, acknowledged that he was

not an expert in PCT. PCT has many, many ramifications, and even
some apparently simple situations don’t turn out to work the way
even he intuitively thought they would. On the other hand, I think there are a lot of people who understand
the basic structure of PCT (and of Bill’s particular version of PCT)
in pretty much the same way. Does that make them experts? Not unless
they have come to it by understanding why Bill came to the structure
he did, and usually people come to that understanding by doing their
own experiments or thought-experiments.
To study mechanics, for a thousand years, people read Aristotle and
“knew” that if you apply a force to an object it will move, and if
you cease applying force, it will stop. Aristotle said that lighter
things fall slower than heavy things. Aristotle was the Authority on
everything! Galileo, on the other hand, tried observing objects
moving under forces, and deduced that if there no friction or air
resistance, the object wouldn’t stop, and that how fast things fall
doesn’t depend on their weight, at least it wouldn’t if the air
resistance could be removed.
Bill probably understood more about PCT than any of us. I’ve been
repeatedly brought up short by thinking I had a great new idea, only
to find that Bill already said it (apart from those times when he
disagreed with it :slight_smile: But that doesn’t make him an expert in the
sense that the Oracle of Delphi was an expert.
Martin

···

On 2015/05/1 2:36 AM, “Boris Hartman”
( via csgnet Mailing List) wrote:

boris.hartman@masicom.net

                As

I said before for me nobody is expert for PCT,
except Bill. It’s his theory.

2

Martin,

I agree with you. I used term »expert«, because Rick was pushing with it. But considering the »defitinition«

…having or showiing special skill or knowledge because of what you have been taught or what you have experienced

It seems that your »definition« suits :

MT : On the other hand, I think there are a lot of people who understand the basic structure of PCT (and of Bill’s particular version of PCT) in pretty much the same way. Does that make them experts? Not unless they have come to it by understanding why Bill came to the structure he did, and usually people come to that understanding by doing their own experiments or thought-experiments.

HB : …and if may add : with experiencing nature, medical researching of LCS, reading books about reasearch, see videos, pictures…. reading Bill’s books, and so on to the final goal : understannding how generally organisms function. I think that we can come to this knowledge through many means, and I think that people choose (with reorganization) myriad possible ways. I would like to see these many ways presented here on CSGnet. Not only one or two, which are always on »menu«. Can you eat potatoes every day ?

I really find refreshing when I hear *barb, Fred, Frank, Erling, Rupert, Adam, Philip… I see the problem only in the way they are being encouradged to discuss …

Boris

···

From: Martin Taylor (mmt-csg@mmtaylor.net via csgnet Mailing List) [mailto:csgnet@lists.illinois.edu]
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 9:16 PM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Who is an expert? (was Re: FW: Protect vs Cancel, etc)

[Martin Taylor 2015.05.01.15.03]

On 2015/05/1 2:36 AM, “Boris Hartman” (boris.hartman@masicom.net via csgnet Mailing List) wrote:

As I said before for me nobody is expert for PCT, except Bill. It’s his theory.

Don’t forget that Bill, from time to time, acknowledged that he was not an expert in PCT. PCT has many, many ramifications, and even some apparently simple situations don’t turn out to work the way even he intuitively thought they would.

On the other hand, I think there are a lot of people who understand the basic structure of PCT (and of Bill’s particular version of PCT) in pretty much the same way. Does that make them experts? Not unless they have come to it by understanding why Bill came to the structure he did, and usually people come to that understanding by doing their own experiments or thought-experiments.

To study mechanics, for a thousand years, people read Aristotle and “knew” that if you apply a force to an object it will move, and if you cease applying force, it will stop. Aristotle said that lighter things fall slower than heavy things. Aristotle was the Authority on everything! Galileo, on the other hand, tried observing objects moving under forces, and deduced that if there no friction or air resistance, the object wouldn’t stop, and that how fast things fall doesn’t depend on their weight, at least it wouldn’t if the air resistance could be removed.

Bill probably understood more about PCT than any of us. I’ve been repeatedly brought up short by thinking I had a great new idea, only to find that Bill already said it (apart from those times when he disagreed with it :slight_smile: But that doesn’t make him an expert in the sense that the Oracle of Delphi was an expert.

Martin