740
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2:
Line 2: + + − + − *the Boston Marathon − *the Tour de France + Line 23:
Line 24: − + + + + + + +
Organized sections; added new "obscurity" problem; added clarification at top
{{cquote|The best of the public is better than a group of experts.}}
{{cquote|The best of the public is better than a group of experts.}}
The concept then became a topic of discussion in the interview of ''Conservapedia'' on the Colbert Report on December 8, 2009.<ref>http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/258144/december-08-2009/andy-schlafly</ref>
The concept then became a topic of discussion in the interview of ''Conservapedia'' on the Colbert Report on December 8, 2009.<ref>http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/258144/december-08-2009/andy-schlafly</ref>
It is important to note that this does not mean ''every'' member of the public is better than experts, but that ''certain'' members of the public - the best members - are better than experts.
Examples of approaches using the "best of the public" include:
Examples of approaches using the "best of the public" include:
*the Olympics
*Sports competitions, such as the [[Olympic Games]], the [[Boston Marathon]], and the [[Tour de France]]. Anyone can enter, and the winner is determined solely by skill.
*American Idol
*American Idol
*Internet blogs. Anyone can start a blog, and readers read the best blog posts.
Intellectual examples of the "best of the public" include:
Intellectual examples of the "best of the public" include:
The same uplifting principle can be seen in any situation in which the best of the public is allowed to freely function and attain its potential. Events like the Olympics and the Tour de France permit the best of the public to strive on a physical level, resulting in many new record-breaking performances. While the principle has seldom (as of yet) been applied to academic endeavors, the [[Conservative Bible Project]] demonstrates the benefits that can result.
The same uplifting principle can be seen in any situation in which the best of the public is allowed to freely function and attain its potential. Events like the Olympics and the Tour de France permit the best of the public to strive on a physical level, resulting in many new record-breaking performances. While the principle has seldom (as of yet) been applied to academic endeavors, the [[Conservative Bible Project]] demonstrates the benefits that can result.
==Obstacles to the Best of the Public Principle==
==Opposition to the Best of the Public==
===Government restrictions===
History demonstrates that the best of the public can only thrive in a free society. The cream cannot rise to the top if it is weighted down; eagles cannot soar if they are shackled by an oppressive government. This understanding is at the heart of conservative wisdom.
History demonstrates that the best of the public can only thrive in a free society. The cream cannot rise to the top if it is weighted down; eagles cannot soar if they are shackled by an oppressive government. This understanding is at the heart of conservative wisdom.
For example: it is only in a free market economy that the best of the public will be truly free to drive innovation, develop new technologies, and generate new wealth. In an overly-regulated economy, the incentive to excel is greatly reduced. Innovation is replaced by stagnation, and achievement by mediocrity.
For example: it is only in a free market economy that the best of the public will be truly free to drive innovation, develop new technologies, and generate new wealth. In an overly-regulated economy, the incentive to excel is greatly reduced. Innovation is replaced by stagnation, and achievement by mediocrity.
===Elite gatekeepers===
Likewise, in an academic environment in which elite "experts" serve as gatekeepers, truly innovative research is frequently squelched in favor of orthodoxy and blind consensus. The chilling effect "scientific experts" can have on honest research was clearly demonstrated by the [[Climategate]] scandal. Even when such "experts" do not actively conspire to suppress dissent, their use of expertise and consensus as a bully pulpit can still silence opposing (and possibly correct) viewpoints.
Likewise, in an academic environment in which elite "experts" serve as gatekeepers, truly innovative research is frequently squelched in favor of orthodoxy and blind consensus. The chilling effect "scientific experts" can have on honest research was clearly demonstrated by the [[Climategate]] scandal. Even when such "experts" do not actively conspire to suppress dissent, their use of expertise and consensus as a bully pulpit can still silence opposing (and possibly correct) viewpoints.
===Mobs===
It is important to note the difference between "Best of the Public" and "mob rule." Simply allowing the loudest or most numerous voices to prevail is not the same thing as allowing the best of the public to drive achievement. Sites such as [[Wikipedia]] operate on the principle of mob rule, and as a result, are plagued with bias, inaccuracy, and an inability to differentiate between significant insights and trivia.
It is important to note the difference between "Best of the Public" and "mob rule." Simply allowing the loudest or most numerous voices to prevail is not the same thing as allowing the best of the public to drive achievement. Sites such as [[Wikipedia]] operate on the principle of mob rule, and as a result, are plagued with bias, inaccuracy, and an inability to differentiate between significant insights and trivia.
One of the most pointed illustrations of this difference is the [[United States]] itself. The [[Founding Fathers]], despite not naming it, applied the "Best of the Public" principle in their attempts to craft a new government. Realizing the danger of mob rule, they rejected a pure democracy in favor of a democratic Republic--a system designed to ensure that, while all of the public would have a voice in their new government, the best of the public would guide that government as elected representatives. In so doing, they clearly affirmed that they believed the best of the public was better than a group of experts; in contrast, the nations of Europe still firmly subscribed to the notion that government should be in the hands of elite "experts" (the ruling families and nobility.)
One of the most pointed illustrations of this difference is the [[United States]] itself. The [[Founding Fathers]], despite not naming it, applied the "Best of the Public" principle in their attempts to craft a new government. Realizing the danger of mob rule, they rejected a pure democracy in favor of a democratic Republic--a system designed to ensure that, while all of the public would have a voice in their new government, the best of the public would guide that government as elected representatives. In so doing, they clearly affirmed that they believed the best of the public was better than a group of experts; in contrast, the nations of Europe still firmly subscribed to the notion that government should be in the hands of elite "experts" (the ruling families and nobility.)
===Obscurity===
The "best of the public" must be able to be heard. There are millions of books published, and even more books self-published without approval of traditional publishing houses. Many authors protest<ref>http://www.teleread.org/2009/09/18/self-publishing-e-books-and-legitimacy-part-3-of-a-series/</ref><ref>"[http://www.baen.com/library/palaver6.htm Prime Palaver #6]", Eric Flint</ref> that this is the greatest problem with modern publishing.
== References ==
== References ==
<references/>
<references/>