Good point. LOL.
Oh-- and expertise quite frequently does NOT result in any sort of consensus regarding what one could term factual "truth" in the first place. Take any three art critics and you'll get four to seven different opinions, all of them at least nominally "expert."
So there's that.
I mean, sure-- nobody wants to hear someone who isn't an electrical engineer expound on their personal "vision" of that subject. (In fact, some of us don't even want to listen to the expert there, but I digress...)
If we decide that as individuals we lack a good understanding and prefer to keep silent (for fear of being wrong, perhaps) then we can't exactly argue that everone else should also be bound by our personal creed on that score and keep their traps zipped as well.
Right? Because that really would be arrogant. What makes me an expert in deciding how much expertise is sufficient to allow someone to make erudite/informed statements on any particular subject? Nothing, that's what.
Fact-based fields are terrific, because nothing is subjective. That's lovely, but it leaves a lot of things in life which are not categorized that way, where subjective truth is the only truth. Art appreciation, for example, simply doesn't operate by the rules which govern electrical engineering.
The world would be a flat and boring place without disagreement regarding more-or-less subjective truths. I enjoy the variety, myself, even if I sometimes find naivete or ignorance quite bemusing or even exasperating.
