Good article here. A couple of notes:
Is the work done by financial engineers really more economically productive than the work done by civil engineers?
Now, this one gets interesting. Not so much the "economically productive" aspect, as the "engineering" aspect.
If a civil engineer makes a mistake - one erring on the side of optimism - the consequences, when they become apparent, can be pinned on him. Also, since the calculations are objective, and the principles well documented, a civil engineer's work can be checked by another civil engineer before the structure is built.
Spotting the errors of a financial "engineer" is more of a challenge, the consequences of error can be much more widespread, and some financiers seem to have a remarkable ability to fail upward, so that the adverse consequences of their failures fall entirely on others.
Everybody can do something better than you can. Imagine how much different our society would be if each of us embraced those words as a daily mantra.
Yup. There are vast areas of endeavor at which I know perfectly well I'm not very good, and it would be better to hand such tasks off to someone better qualified. (Later this year, for example, finding a real accountant will become a priority.)
On the other hand, sometimes finding the someone who can do it better can be a challenge, and for small projects the handoff can be more trouble than it's worth. And sometimes doing it myself, not so well, can be educational, fun, or both.
I have a suspicion that religion, as well as social isolation, has something to do with the arrogance/humility divide. While the coastal irreligious (looks in mirror) tend to perceive the our deity talks directly to us crowd as being arrogant, what are we to say of those who believe we are as gods, and it is our destiny to reshape mankind?
A fine example of arrogance was on display in the past week, as the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists fiddled with its "clock". Arrogance? Yup. Even if we grant the premise that the clock-fiddlers are actual atomic scientists and not mere activists playing dress-up, consider: how does expertise in nuclear physics grant insights into geopolitics? It's not like they're related fields.
Sure, as with any technical field, the politicians routinely make false assumptions about what the technology can and can't do (see also: encryption and search warrants, or anything an urban Democrat says about guns), and need their magical thinking corrected. But the ability to point out that the ruling class is talking nonsense in any particular field does not imply omniscience.
By extension, if a famous actor makes proclamations on any subject other than acting, it is entirely appropriate to question his expertise.
Recent Comments