The reliability of scholars

We believe in people "scholarly" for various reasons (emotional sympathy, fame, beauty, decorated, contagion, suggestion), oblivious to the reliability (objective truth) of his sayings.

The word "scholarship" means "deep and extensive knowledge in science, arts and other subjects."

Many people rely on what they say who they are or seem "scholars." There is consensus in affirming that knowledge are reliable. Moreover, it is also said that what scholars know, "is the truth."

How do we know that someone knows and tells the truth? In most cases we are guided by data rather uncertain, subjective, emotional.

One of the data we have to say that John Doe is a "scholar" comes from other people that say it is, we are guided by the fame that has come to our ears.

Another data we have to say about the validity of what they know and scholars say comes from personal appearance: speak calmly, conviction, firmly. We can not detect in the way it presents any doubt, shyness, insecurity.

One important thing that we may rely on such scholar is that at least say something we already have by the way, for example, if you start referring to any proverb ("Who all trades"), we began to think it is someone "as reliable as us."

Generally people assume that provided great knowledge true, are surrounded by a certain aura, a certain set. Each audience has a favorite decoration: sober, bright, colorful, large, luxurious, with film music, special effects, technology, modest dress, clappers scattered, enthusiastic and highly contagious.

Not only do we believe our reliable references (advertising, publishing, awards, political leaders) but also believe in the scholars who applaud without knowing why (by contagion, by fanaticism, by suggestion).

Note: Original in Spanish (without translation by Google): La confiabilidad en los eruditos.

(This is the Item No. 1697)

●●●