Pieces of paper prove nothing

Acg67

Bro 1 : Carbs are bad, they caused unicorns to become extinct

Person 2:

Bro 1: I have a degree from Harvard, double majored in Ancient Equestrian Studies and Crypto zoology AND my professor was a Rhodes scholar

Person 2: So?

Bro 1: It means I know what I'm talking about

Person 2: How does that prove carbs made unicorns become extinct?

Bro 1: I have a degree from Harvard, double majored in Ancient Equestrian Studies and Crypto zoology AND my professor was a Rhodes scholar

Person 2: ::Facepalm::


The point being regardless of where you may have a piece of paper from, it doesn't make what you're saying any more accurate or true. People who have to tout their credentials to strengthen their argument are most likely making a pretty crappy argument in the first place. Keep this in mind when reading the forums, watching TV or reading articles.

cgrout78

erm...slow day at work? Haha.

Avalonis

But everyone knows the unicorns became extinct because of crapping out rainbows.

Rainbows are big. Things tore.

Rachaelluvszipped

Lol

moonsforeyes

Well said. People feel their schooling/credentials make them superior and more knowledgeable than everyone who may not have the same education as them.

fitaliciag

thank you! i totally agree

RobynC79

Hey, I am totally with you when that piece of paper has nothing to do with the topic, but I'm going to defend my fellow scientists and degree-holders here.

If someone posts a topic claiming that artificial sweeteners rot your brain cells, or meat rots in your stomach, or neurodegenerative disease and cancer can be prevented by some magic diet, we will absolutely respond by using the body of knowledge gained by those degrees we use every day to debunk these patently false claims.

Now if I had a degree in ancient aramiac literature, then yeah, me using my degree to support assertions about physiology and biology would be wholly deserving of your scorn. But I don't - I have a PhD in biology and neuroscience - if I respond to a relevant thread it's usually because I *know* something about that topic (and generally we don't make assertions about areas in which we're not well versed). Do you have to believe every word I say? Of course not, that's why I (and most of the other scientists I've seen responding regularly) give citations and evidence for our positions.

If that information contradicts a belief you personally hold dear, that's fine. You use your experience and knowledge to make your point, and I use mine. It doesn't make me always right, or anyone else wrong, but more information from knowledgeable sources is not a bad thing.

JennieAL

Rather than spend too much time deciding whether to believe Bro 1 or Person 2, do your own research! Nothing beats taking responsibility for finding out correct information & science for yourself. As much as I love following the more knowledgeable "gurus" here at MFP, nothing beats the peace of mind in finding the stuff out for myself.

Acg67

Hey, I am totally with you when that piece of paper has nothing to do with the topic, but I'm going to defend my fellow scientists and degree-holders here.

If someone posts a topic claiming that artificial sweeteners rot your brain cells, or meat rots in your stomach, or neurodegenerative disease and cancer can be prevented by some magic diet, we will absolutely respond by using the body of knowledge gained by those degrees we use every day to debunk these patently false claims.

I wasn't bashing degree holders, but those that think that simply having a degree lends more credence to their claims, regardless of how nonsensical their claims may be. You can usually get an idea of people who know that they are talking about, without them ever having to bring up they have a degree, training cert or what have you.

sdrawkcabynot

Rather than spend too much time deciding whether to believe Bro 1 or Person 2, do your own research! Nothing beats taking responsibility for finding out correct information & science for yourself. As much as I love following the more knowledgeable "gurus" here at MFP, nothing beats the peace of mind in finding the stuff out for myself.

But yet we still get the *kitten**ng idiots on here that ask for opinions when theirs are already made up.

*punches babies and kicks old people*

sdrawkcabynot

Hey, I am totally with you when that piece of paper has nothing to do with the topic, but I'm going to defend my fellow scientists and degree-holders here.

If someone posts a topic claiming that artificial sweeteners rot your brain cells, or meat rots in your stomach, or neurodegenerative disease and cancer can be prevented by some magic diet, we will absolutely respond by using the body of knowledge gained by those degrees we use every day to debunk these patently false claims.

I wasn't bashing degree holders, but those that think that simply having a degree lends more credence to their claims, regardless of how nonsensical their claims may be. You can usually get an idea of people who know that they are talking about, without them ever having to bring up they have a degree, training cert or what have you.

I only try to believe those that reference wikipedia - cause we all know those are stone cold facts *smh* & *rme*

engineman312

i'm a firm believer that a college degree only means you had the money to pay for college. i've met many stupid people with degrees, in all fields.

BrettPGH

Hey, I am totally with you when that piece of paper has nothing to do with the topic, but I'm going to defend my fellow scientists and degree-holders here.

If someone posts a topic claiming that artificial sweeteners rot your brain cells, or meat rots in your stomach, or neurodegenerative disease and cancer can be prevented by some magic diet, we will absolutely respond by using the body of knowledge gained by those degrees we use every day to debunk these patently false claims.

Now if I had a degree in ancient aramiac literature, then yeah, me using my degree to support assertions about physiology and biology would be wholly deserving of your scorn. But I don't - I have a PhD in biology and neuroscience - if I respond to a relevant thread it's usually because I *know* something about that topic (and generally we don't make assertions about areas in which we're not well versed). Do you have to believe every word I say? Of course not, that's why I (and most of the other scientists I've seen responding regularly) give citations and evidence for our positions.

If that information contradicts a belief you personally hold dear, that's fine. You use your experience and knowledge to make your point, and I use mine. It doesn't make me always right, or anyone else wrong, but more information from knowledgeable sources is not a bad thing.

Thanks for that. I know I would listen to the experts over a random person anytime. At least they have the relevant credentials to back themselves up.

They have those degrees for a reason. They've done the work. They know what's up. Trust reliable, educated sources.

Acg67

Hey, I am totally with you when that piece of paper has nothing to do with the topic, but I'm going to defend my fellow scientists and degree-holders here.

If someone posts a topic claiming that artificial sweeteners rot your brain cells, or meat rots in your stomach, or neurodegenerative disease and cancer can be prevented by some magic diet, we will absolutely respond by using the body of knowledge gained by those degrees we use every day to debunk these patently false claims.

Now if I had a degree in ancient aramiac literature, then yeah, me using my degree to support assertions about physiology and biology would be wholly deserving of your scorn. But I don't - I have a PhD in biology and neuroscience - if I respond to a relevant thread it's usually because I *know* something about that topic (and generally we don't make assertions about areas in which we're not well versed). Do you have to believe every word I say? Of course not, that's why I (and most of the other scientists I've seen responding regularly) give citations and evidence for our positions.

If that information contradicts a belief you personally hold dear, that's fine. You use your experience and knowledge to make your point, and I use mine. It doesn't make me always right, or anyone else wrong, but more information from knowledgeable sources is not a bad thing.

Thanks for that. I know I would listen to the experts over a random person anytime. At least they have the relevant credentials to back themselves up.

They have those degrees for a reason. They've done the work. They know what's up. Trust reliable, educated sources.

Like Dr. Oz?

frazzle29

I would have to agree with the OP. I have an AA in computer programming and I couldn't program a computer to save my life!

almc170

i'm a firm believer that a college degree only means you had the money to pay for college. i've met many stupid people with degrees, in all fields.

All too true, unfortunately

BrettPGH

Like Dr. Oz?

Oooh get me with my weak points why don't you?!

But here's the rub. I'm sure Dr. Oz is actually a pretty good surgeon. That's what he's trained in. So that's his area of expertise and I'd certainly defer to him over what some person on the street said when it comes to cardiovascular issues.

Now reiki? That's just horseS no matter how you slice it. So the lesson is you listen to experts when they are discussing their field of expertise. Not in all things.

tigersword

Hey, I am totally with you when that piece of paper has nothing to do with the topic, but I'm going to defend my fellow scientists and degree-holders here.

If someone posts a topic claiming that artificial sweeteners rot your brain cells, or meat rots in your stomach, or neurodegenerative disease and cancer can be prevented by some magic diet, we will absolutely respond by using the body of knowledge gained by those degrees we use every day to debunk these patently false claims.

Now if I had a degree in ancient aramiac literature, then yeah, me using my degree to support assertions about physiology and biology would be wholly deserving of your scorn. But I don't - I have a PhD in biology and neuroscience - if I respond to a relevant thread it's usually because I *know* something about that topic (and generally we don't make assertions about areas in which we're not well versed). Do you have to believe every word I say? Of course not, that's why I (and most of the other scientists I've seen responding regularly) give citations and evidence for our positions.

If that information contradicts a belief you personally hold dear, that's fine. You use your experience and knowledge to make your point, and I use mine. It doesn't make me always right, or anyone else wrong, but more information from knowledgeable sources is not a bad thing.

Thanks for that. I know I would listen to the experts over a random person anytime. At least they have the relevant credentials to back themselves up.

They have those degrees for a reason. They've done the work. They know what's up. Trust reliable, educated sources.

It's not whether the person has the credentials or not, it's more about people using those credentials as their justification for making a claim, rather than actual scientific evidence.

If I have a degree in biology, and I'm making a claim about biology, I should be able to produce scientific proof for my claims, if I am an expert. If my only proof is "I HAVE A DEGREE IN BIOLOGY," then it is pretty clear that what I'm saying has no real merit, from a factual standpoint.

There's a huge difference between someone being an expert, and someone just having a degree.

JennieAL

i'm a firm believer that a college degree only means you had the money to pay for college. i've met many stupid people with degrees, in all fields.

Guess you don't pal around with the ones who actually learned something then. Having a college degree can mean many different things. Determination and persistence come to mind. And that can't be bought.

"Stupid" is relative. Having a higher education degree usually isn't a stupid choice.

BrettPGH

It's not whether the person has the credentials or not, it's more about people using those credentials as their justification for making a claim, rather than actual scientific evidence.

If I have a degree in biology, and I'm making a claim about biology, I should be able to produce scientific proof for my claims, if I am an expert. If my only proof is "I HAVE A DEGREE IN BIOLOGY," then it is pretty clear that what I'm saying has no real merit, from a factual standpoint.

There's a huge difference between someone being an expert, and someone just having a degree.

No one supports the use of peer reviewed and evaluated evidence more than me. Of course anyone with a degree should be able to back up their claims with studies cited. If they can't, if all they say is "Shutup I know things I have degree mmhmm french fried potaters" then you should not only ignore them but also question if they're being honest in the first place.

I'm just trying to combat the very common internet meme "Yeah screw scientists and doctors! What the hell do they know!" It really irritates me, especially since we are all communicating using the internet.

sn0wd0gg

Reminds me of a guy i know - he and I were arguing some point about Doppler shift in light. Don't ask me the details now as I've forgotten them, but we were at an ice rink when the debate came up (go figure!) Anyway, at one point he pulled the degree card on me and just says "I've got a PhD!" .... silence.

This same guy, later on, was at an event where he was in the same room with the mummy of Ramses the Great. He thought it was king Tut. So much for the PhD I guess! :-)

Acg67

It's not whether the person has the credentials or not, it's more about people using those credentials as their justification for making a claim, rather than actual scientific evidence.

If I have a degree in biology, and I'm making a claim about biology, I should be able to produce scientific proof for my claims, if I am an expert. If my only proof is "I HAVE A DEGREE IN BIOLOGY," then it is pretty clear that what I'm saying has no real merit, from a factual standpoint.

There's a huge difference between someone being an expert, and someone just having a degree.

No one supports the use of peer reviewed and evaluated evidence more than me. Of course anyone with a degree should be able to back up their claims with studies cited. If they can't, if all they say is "Shutup I know things I have degree mmhmm french fried potaters" then you should not only ignore them but also question if they're being honest in the first place.

I'm just trying to combat the very common internet meme "Yeah screw scientists and doctors! What the hell do they know!" It really irritates me, especially since we are all communicating using the internet.

That was never the intention of the thread to bash degree holders or people who have worked their butts off to get an advanced degree, but as Tiger pointed out, to point out if you're propagating myth and junk science, merely having a degree in a relevant field doesn't make what you're saying any more true then if you didn't have a degree

privatetime

My 2 cents... I'm always amazed by how much expertise in a given subject so many arguably completely inexpert people fancy themselves to have. (I have actual, legitimate expertise in a couple of fields, and I couldn't be bothered correcting the avalanche of myths, misinformation, and outright lies posted on those subjects every day, online. My colleagues and I could have a reasoned debate on those subjects, understanding the entire scope of reference, while accepting the limitations of science today. "The public" is so convinced of their superior, infinite knowledge, they can't be reasoned with. These kinds of people "know" because they heard it from someone, or read it somewhere or, better yet, read it ten times...so it must be true.)

Then I remember that, had the Internet existed a few hundred years ago, we'd have the majority saying, "Everybody knows the world is flat. I don't care what you say about this new 'science' of 'astronomy', or how many years of education and practice you claim to have. The world is flat. Everybody knows that."

I can only wish everyone peace.

engineman312

i'm a firm believer that a college degree only means you had the money to pay for college. i've met many stupid people with degrees, in all fields.

Guess you don't pal around with the ones who actually learned something then. Having a college degree can mean many different things. Determination and persistence come to mind. And that can't be bought.

"Stupid" is relative. Having a higher education degree usually isn't a stupid choice.

i have a bachelors in mechanical engineering and getting my MS in Energy Management. they're from public schools. and yet i still have to explain to the newest intern from a private engineering company how to do certain (most) things.

RobynC79

Hey, I am totally with you when that piece of paper has nothing to do with the topic, but I'm going to defend my fellow scientists and degree-holders here.

If someone posts a topic claiming that artificial sweeteners rot your brain cells, or meat rots in your stomach, or neurodegenerative disease and cancer can be prevented by some magic diet, we will absolutely respond by using the body of knowledge gained by those degrees we use every day to debunk these patently false claims.

Now if I had a degree in ancient aramiac literature, then yeah, me using my degree to support assertions about physiology and biology would be wholly deserving of your scorn. But I don't - I have a PhD in biology and neuroscience - if I respond to a relevant thread it's usually because I *know* something about that topic (and generally we don't make assertions about areas in which we're not well versed). Do you have to believe every word I say? Of course not, that's why I (and most of the other scientists I've seen responding regularly) give citations and evidence for our positions.

If that information contradicts a belief you personally hold dear, that's fine. You use your experience and knowledge to make your point, and I use mine. It doesn't make me always right, or anyone else wrong, but more information from knowledgeable sources is not a bad thing.

Thanks for that. I know I would listen to the experts over a random person anytime. At least they have the relevant credentials to back themselves up.

They have those degrees for a reason. They've done the work. They know what's up. Trust reliable, educated sources.

It's not whether the person has the credentials or not, it's more about people using those credentials as their justification for making a claim, rather than actual scientific evidence.

If I have a degree in biology, and I'm making a claim about biology, I should be able to produce scientific proof for my claims, if I am an expert. If my only proof is "I HAVE A DEGREE IN BIOLOGY," then it is pretty clear that what I'm saying has no real merit, from a factual standpoint.

There's a huge difference between someone being an expert, and someone just having a degree.

I agree with you - but I know of very few scientists who use the mere existence of their degree as their supporting argument. Nearly all the scientists who post on these boards who mention they hold a degree in a certain field, are telling us that as a way of indicating their access to scientific evidence and knowledge, and that evidence then supports whatever claim their making.

Anyone who says simply 'believe me because I have a degree in x' is more than likely not a scientist or an expert in their field. Working scientists have not only the letters after their names, but the knowledge and experience to provide evidentiary support for their positions.

ETA - looks like we're all pretty much on the same page by now - yay for science!!

JennieAL

It's not whether the person has the credentials or not, it's more about people using those credentials as their justification for making a claim, rather than actual scientific evidence.

That's it. In a nutshell.

There's a huge difference between someone being an expert, and someone just having a degree.

Exactly. I have degrees in fields where I'm not considered an expert. And I'd be the first person to tell you so.

BrettPGH

That was never the intention of the thread to bash degree holders or people who have worked their butts off to get an advanced degree, but as Tiger pointed out, to point out if you're propagating myth and junk science, merely having a degree in a relevant field doesn't make what you're saying any more true then if you didn't have a degree

You can say that, and I'm sure you feel that way. But the thread title says otherwise. You refer to those degrees as mere pieces of paper that prove nothing. True in a sense. But you could say the same about cash money. I doubt you consider a stack of 100's to be nothing more than pieces of paper.

The "piece of paper" is evidence that the person in question has done some learned work in a chosen field. No it is not a be-all-end-all. But it's better than nothing and worlds better than "well my friend says..."

Plus anyone spreading myth and junk science doesn't deserve the degree they have anyway. That's the fault of the individual. Not the scientific or educational community. Seeing one crackpot with a PHD does not negate the rest of them.

Quasita

People give me crap a lot for having a degree in literature... The fact of the matter is, though, that my studies refined my reading comprehension, and I can handle doing the research for myself. Then I write blog articles to explain it to other people.

I love how some people think it's a cop out when I state my opinion, but recommend a person see a professional in person. The reason I say it so often is because no one online can tell you what's going on with YOU, they can only give general info or stuff related to themselves. Granted, even in person, a counselor can be wrong, but they are much more likely to be specifically helpful.

So anyway, if you need a professional, see a professional, not MFP.

I have a Grand Masters in Bullsh!t afterall

Acg67

That was never the intention of the thread to bash degree holders or people who have worked their butts off to get an advanced degree, but as Tiger pointed out, to point out if you're propagating myth and junk science, merely having a degree in a relevant field doesn't make what you're saying any more true then if you didn't have a degree

You can say that, and I'm sure you feel that way. But the thread title says otherwise. You refer to those degrees as mere pieces of paper that prove nothing. True in a sense. But you could say the same about cash money. I doubt you consider a stack of 100's to be nothing more than pieces of paper.

The "piece of paper" is evidence that the person in question has done some learned work in a chosen field. No it is not a be-all-end-all. But it's better than nothing and worlds better than "well my friend says..."

It's only evidence that they did enough to get a passing grade and graduate, it says nothing to them having actually learned or retained any knowledge at all. Just by having a degree in a subject doesn't necessarily make them more knowledgeable in a given subject then someone without one

Quasita

That was never the intention of the thread to bash degree holders or people who have worked their butts off to get an advanced degree, but as Tiger pointed out, to point out if you're propagating myth and junk science, merely having a degree in a relevant field doesn't make what you're saying any more true then if you didn't have a degree

You can say that, and I'm sure you feel that way. But the thread title says otherwise. You refer to those degrees as mere pieces of paper that prove nothing. True in a sense. But you could say the same about cash money. I doubt you consider a stack of 100's to be nothing more than pieces of paper.

The "piece of paper" is evidence that the person in question has done some learned work in a chosen field. No it is not a be-all-end-all. But it's better than nothing and worlds better than "well my friend says..."

It's only evidence that they did enough to get a passing grade and graduate, it says nothing to them having actually learned or retained any knowledge at all. Just by having a degree in a subject doesn't necessarily make them more knowledgeable in a given subject then someone without one

This reminds me of when I got into an argument with my mom about diabetes symptoms. My mom claimed that since she's been living with it for over 20 years, she knew more, and that there was no way that weight gain was a symptom of diabetes.
Yet, my dad whipped out the smartphone and googled it and found multiple sources where it was in fact listed as a symptom.

The point all in all is that you'd hope the more educated people in society would be open to more perspectives, and therefore learning and challenging their own knowledge. This is the debate between "book smart" and "street smart" really. Too many people sit on the degree and don't look past it, relying on it to win everything... But the knowledge does become obsolete, and the farther from your graduation you get, the more re-education you need.

JennieAL

But the knowledge does become obsolete, and the farther from your graduation you get, the more re-education you need.

Yes! And it's these people who can become the most dangerous or detrimental to their fields.