Credentials vs Expertise
Discussions debate the value of academic credentials like PhDs and degrees as indicators of true expertise or skill, often criticizing credentialism and highlighting cases where credentials do not equate to competence.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
No PhD does not imply no expertise
No becabuse academic credentials don’t mean anything
'20 weeks of emailing experts' and 'an undergraduate CS degree' do not count as 'credentials'.
yep exactly, even with training and degrees and claims of competence
They're credentialed, but educated might be pushing it.
Highly credentialed != highly skilled.
This is a unnecessarily harsh response. Those credentials are great for you, but I'm not sure they add too much to the conversation.
I think everyone should stop prefacing personal assessments of people by quoting their credentials first (MSc/PhD from a top X university), as I feel it should have absolutely no bearing on how intelligent one perceives them to be. I've met some seriously incompetent grad students, and they all seem to get their degrees in the end regardless.
Isn't the real problem here that we rely on "academia" to be the "experts"? I know a number of very accomplished and intelligent folks that did not pursue PhD and have done phenomenally well in their own research. But sadly many, for credibility's sake, had to advertise themselves as think tanks. Why can't we just put the damn degrees down and listen to the person to judge their competency??
People who don't have credentials don't like credentials