We live in the age of expertise. There’s an expert for everything — from climate change to cryptocurrency, pandemics to parenting. We’ve been taught that experts are the ultimate source of truth. After all, they’ve got the degrees, the titles, the white coats, and the data.
And yet… they seem to get things wrong. A lot.
Sometimes spectacularly wrong.
They promise certainty, but reality delivers chaos. They make predictions that collapse under the weight of real-world complexity. They push policies with laser-like focus — and ignore the collateral damage happening in plain sight.
Why does this happen? And more importantly, why does it happen so often?
1. The Human Mind Can’t See the Whole Picture
An uncomfortable truth: no human — no matter how intelligent, how well-educated, or how well-funded — can ever fully see the entire picture of a complex real-world problem.
The reasons are baked into our biology and our civilization:
- Limits of intelligence: The human brain can only juggle so many variables before it starts dropping pieces.
- Scope of expertise: Every field is staggeringly vast; even if you dedicate your entire life to one subject, you’ll master only a tiny fraction of it.
- Interconnected reality: Every subject overlaps with countless others. Medicine bleeds into psychology, which bleeds into sociology, which bleeds into economics, which bleeds into politics — and no one person can be an expert in all of them.
That means every expert’s knowledge is a partial map of reality, not the full territory.
2. Experts Live in a Tiny Slice of the Universe
An “expert” is someone who has drilled deeply into a very narrow domain. That’s how they become experts — they specialize, they focus, they strip away distractions.
The problem? The real world doesn’t respect those boundaries.
A pandemic isn’t just a medical problem — it’s also an economic problem, a mental health problem, an educational problem, a political problem, and more.
When a virologist says, “Our only goal is to stop COVID deaths”, they’re speaking as if the rest of reality can be put on pause. But life doesn’t work like that. If you save someone from COVID but bankrupt their business, destroy their mental health, and delay their cancer screening, have you really “saved” them?
3. The Single-Goal Trap
Experts often operate with a single mission statement:
- “Stop the virus.”
- “Increase GDP.”
- “Lower carbon emissions.”
- “Cure the cancer.”
On paper, that focus is admirable — it’s what makes them relentless in solving their chosen problem.
But in practice? That focus becomes tunnel vision.
And tunnel vision is dangerous. It means:
- Trade-offs are ignored.
- Collateral damage is invisible.
- The “solution” can create more harm than the original problem.
During COVID, for example, the singular obsession with “reduce transmission at all costs” led to lockdown policies that undeniably saved some lives — but also delayed cancer treatments, worsened mental health, spiked domestic violence, disrupted education, and plunged economies into chaos.
A pandemic is a multi-dimensional crisis, but experts were looking through a keyhole.
4. The Blind Spot Problem
Even the most brilliant expert only knows the variables inside their own discipline. The rest? Often invisible to them.
- An infectious disease modeler might be world-class at predicting viral spread, but utterly clueless about how humans actually behave under fear or lockdown.
- A financial analyst might perfectly model market risk, but miss that a political decision in another country will make the whole model irrelevant.
- A climate scientist might understand atmospheric physics in exquisite detail, but know little about the economic systems required to actually change emissions.
These unknown unknowns aren’t minor details — they can be the decisive factors that turn “expert consensus” into a massive error.
5. Overconfidence and the Aura of Authority
Experts have a problem: they’re human. And humans are prone to overconfidence, especially when we’ve spent decades being told we’re the smartest person in the room.
The public has a problem too: we conflate expertise in one domain with wisdom in all domains. So when an epidemiologist makes pronouncements about economics, or a physicist pontificates on philosophy, we tend to nod along — even if they’re way outside their lane.
The result? Confident people making confident-sounding statements… with a shockingly low hit rate.
6. The Incentive System Is Broken
Experts aren’t always free agents of truth. They work within systems — governments, universities, corporations — and those systems have agendas.
An expert’s funding, career prospects, and influence often depend on:
- Saying things that align with their institution’s goals.
- Staying within the bounds of their specialty (even if the real problem is interdisciplinary).
- Avoiding public admission of uncertainty (because “I don’t know” doesn’t make headlines).
This creates pressure to sound certain rather than be correct.
So, Should We Just Ignore Experts?
No. Without experts, we’d be fumbling in the dark. Expertise matters — it’s the foundation of medicine, engineering, science, and progress.
But here’s the thing: We must treat experts as sources of partial truth, not ultimate truth. Their perspective is valuable, but incomplete.
Good decision-making requires:
- Multiple disciplines at the table (not just the loudest specialist).
- Transparency about trade-offs (“We can save these lives, but it will cost us in these other ways.”).
- Humility — both from the experts and from the public about what experts can realistically know.
Final thought:
An expert is like a flashlight in the dark — they illuminate part of the room brilliantly, but the rest is still in shadow. The danger is when they insist their beam is all that matters… and we believe them.
Discover more from Brin Wilson...
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
