VIDEO
HIGHLIGHT
Log InSign up
Ultracrépidarianisme
SummaryTranscriptChat

Ultracrépidarianisme

The Paradox of Ultra Crepidarianism

This section introduces the concept of ultra crepidarianism, which refers to individuals speaking on topics beyond their expertise. It questions the competence of those who claim to make decisions for everyone and limit freedoms.

Understanding Ultra Crepidarianism

  • Ultra crepidarianism is a popular concept that highlights the paradox of individuals speaking on topics they have limited knowledge about.
  • It is often associated with amateurism and dilettantism, contrasting with expertise.
  • The use of sophistry and conspiracy theories can be seen as part of this phenomenon.

Competence in Decision-Making

  • The question arises regarding the real competencies of those who claim to decide for everyone and restrict freedoms.
  • Examples are given, such as politicians making contradictory statements and decisions despite media support.
  • The speaker challenges the audience's competence in discussing topics like republicanism, economics, climate change, vaccines, and government measures.

Criticizing Expertise

  • The speaker questions whether one needs to be an expert to discuss certain subjects or understand complex matters fully.
  • Examples are provided where banks create money without state control and are bailed out by taxpayers when they fail due to mismanagement.
  • The audience is asked if they have opinions on various topics like global warming, COVID-19 vaccines, lockdowns, and mask-wearing.

Accusations of Ultra Crepidarianism

  • Speaking out on these issues may lead others to label individuals as practicing ultra crepidarianism or being conspiracy theorists.
  • Cultural trends tend to suppress forms of dissent while calling for humility from those who protest against established narratives.

Origins and Meaning

  • The term "ultra crepidarianism" originates from the Latin expression "sutor ne supra crepidam," referring to a cobbler not going beyond the sandal.
  • It implies overstepping one's area of expertise and overestimating one's knowledge and abilities.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect

  • The Dunning-Kruger effect is mentioned, which suggests that less qualified individuals tend to express opinions on topics they know little about, while more competent individuals assume their knowledge is easily understood by others.
  • Generalizations based on surveys and pseudo-psychosociological studies contribute to the current trend of dismissing people's opinions.

Anecdotes Illustrating Incompetence

  • An anecdote is shared about a painter who sought feedback from passersby, including a cobbler who noticed an error in his painting. The painter then dismissed the cobbler's opinion, claiming he knew nothing beyond shoes.
  • Another anecdote involves experts failing to solve a problem until an ignorant person enters the room and provides a solution. This highlights the importance of considering input from supposedly incompetent individuals.

Humility and Competence

  • The phrase "the shoemaker's children go barefoot" is mentioned as an expression justifying incompetence. However, it also acknowledges that cobblers were historically unable to afford their own products.
  • The speaker encourages skepticism towards those who demand humility based on perceived incompetence.

Historical Context of Ultra Crepidarianism

This section delves into the historical context of ultra crepidarianism, focusing on an ancient Greek painter named Apelles and his interaction with a cobbler.

Apelles and the Cobbler

  • In ancient Greece around 380-350 BC, a painter named Apelles would exhibit his paintings for public viewing.
  • Instead of relying solely on his own judgment, he would listen to critiques from curious onlookers.
  • One day, a cobbler noticed an error in one of Apelles' paintings and pointed it out.
  • The next day, the cobbler noticed that the error had been corrected.

Artist's Sensitivity and Authority

  • This anecdote highlights the sensitivity of the artist rather than the incompetence of the cobbler.
  • It also emphasizes the misuse of argument from authority by the artist, who claimed to know more than the cobbler about subjects beyond shoes.

Experts and Ignorance

  • Another story is mentioned where experts gathered to solve a problem but failed to find a solution until an ignorant person entered and provided one.
  • This illustrates the importance of considering input from supposedly incompetent individuals.

The Value of Incompetence

This section explores the value of incompetence in certain situations and challenges assumptions about expertise.

The Cliché of "The Shoemaker's Children Go Barefoot"

  • The phrase "the shoemaker's children go barefoot" is often used to justify incompetence.
  • However, it originally referred to cobblers being unable to afford their own products, rather than their lack of skill.

Challenging Expertise

  • The speaker encourages skepticism towards those who demand humility based on perceived incompetence.
  • It is important to give voice to so-called incompetent individuals as they may offer valuable insights or solutions.

Conclusion

Ultra crepidarianism raises questions about competence, expertise, and decision-making. It challenges assumptions about who has the right to speak on certain topics and highlights the value of considering diverse perspectives.

Speech on Competence

In this section, the speaker discusses the concept of competence and its relation to freedom of expression and decision-making. The ideas of Michel Bakounine from 1870 are referenced to highlight the importance of consulting different authorities in various fields while maintaining the right to criticize and control.

Importance of Consulting Authorities

  • According to Michel Bakounine, when it comes to specific areas such as boots, one should consult the authority of a cobbler. Similarly, for matters related to buildings or infrastructure, the opinion of an architect or engineer should be considered.
  • Different sciences have their own experts, and their knowledge should be respected and listened to. However, this does not mean blindly accepting their opinions without critical thinking.
  • The speaker emphasizes that citizens who express themselves and voice their concerns should not be excluded from decision-making processes. Those who claim expertise or authority should not disregard the perspectives of those affected by their decisions.

Freedom of Decision-Making

This section explores how freedom of decision-making can be exercised through quality information sharing. It highlights the dangers of arbitrary decision-making by self-proclaimed experts and calls for inclusive discussions where diverse perspectives are valued.

Exercising Freedom of Decision-Making

  • The speaker argues that individuals should have the right to give their opinions based on what they see and feel. For example, they should be able to discuss medical decisions when undergoing surgery or provide input on public investments if they pay taxes.
  • However, exercising freedom of decision-making requires access to quality information that is shared openly. Without this, decisions may be influenced by those claiming expertise or authority without considering diverse viewpoints.
  • The ultra-critical authoritarianism mentioned tends to discredit those who demand the right to speak up but are hindered from doing so.

Open Discussions and Governance

This section emphasizes the importance of open discussions, sharing ideas, and engaging in governance that adapts to the needs of citizens. It encourages critical thinking, collaboration, and respectful debates to make informed decisions.

Collaborative Decision-Making

  • The speaker suggests that individuals should express their opinions on various topics without restrictions. Instead of engaging in polemics or disqualifying others' perspectives, it is important to reflect and reason together.
  • The focus should be on adapting governance systems rather than restricting citizenship. Citizens should discuss matters that concern them and confront different viewpoints to make influential decisions.
  • Acknowledging that everyone has limited expertise, the speaker encourages a moment of disqualification for those who aim to discredit public debate using certain words or concepts.

Conclusion

In this concluding section, the speaker expresses gratitude for the audience's attention and highlights the significance of learning through words and participating in public debates.

Importance of Words and Participation

  • The speaker concludes by thanking the audience for their attention, emphasizing that learning occurs through words.
  • Participating in public debates allows individuals to share ideas, use their imagination, apply reasoning skills, and contribute to decision-making processes.
  • The video ends with a reminder that everyone's opinion is based on amateur experiences, highlighting the need to avoid disqualifying others' perspectives in public discourse.

Timestamps provided are approximate as they were not mentioned explicitly in the transcript.

Video description

Une contestation de l'usage de ce terme pour mettre en cause le comportement du cordonnier qui consiste à parler de ce qu'on ne connait pas, comme dans l'anecdote de référence, consiste à pointer le comportement du peintre. Ainsi, l'ultracrepidarianisme consisterait plutôt à mettre en cause le comportement consistant à prétendre consulter l'avis des personnes et au final à limiter leur droit d'expression à des considérations arbitraires définies opportunément par une personne en position d'autorité de fonction. La référence au cordonnier dans cette locution latine tend à dévaloriser l’intervention d’une personne qui s’exprime sur un sujet qui n’est pas dans son champ de compétences. Voici l’histoire de référence : C’était dans les années -380-350, en Grèce. Un peintre nommé Apelle de Cos aurait pris pour habitude d’exposer ses œuvres à la vue des passants. Caché et plutôt que d’en rester à ses seules appréciations, il écoutait les critiques des curieux. Un cordonnier aurait remarqué une erreur sur une anse de chaussures. Le lendemain, le même cordonnier constatant que le défaut était corrigé, se mit à critiquer la jambe. L’artiste se serait montré et aurait dit au cordonnier de se limiter à la chaussure, parce qu’au-dessus, il n’y connaitrait rien. Parmi ceux que je cite ou auxquels je fais référence : • Etienne Klein : https://youtu.be/f89WVeqWe-M • Arthur Schopenhauer : L’art d’avoir toujours raison • Michel Bakounine : Œuvres complètes • Par un futur ministre : La République des imbéciles • Michel Crozier, avec Bruno Tilliette, La crise de l’intelligence • Pline l’ancien ? • Benedikt Meyer : Les sandales romaine, pierre angulaire de l’édifice de l’empire romain : https://blog.nationalmuseum.ch/fr/2018/09/conquete-militaire-grace-aux-sandales/ Pour quelques-uns, l’ultracrepidarianisme pourrait être un trouble mental, du genre d’un individu qui aurait fait un braquage après s’être enduit de jus de citron pour se rendre invisible et il n’aurait donc pas compris comment la police pouvait le voir. Mais aussi comment aurait-il été vu pour faire peur ? Blog sur la psychologie et la philosophie : https://nospensees.fr/les-ultracrepidariens-des-personnes-qui-donnent-leur-avis-sans-avoir-de-connaissances-sur-le-sujet/ Je vous offre en ligne cette citation de Michel Bakounine qui a orienté l'exigence de ma réflexion : reconnaître l'autorité du cordonnier, sans s'y soumettre, garder le sens critique : « Lorsqu’il s’agit de bottes, j’en réfère à l’autorité du cordonnier ; s’il s’agit d’une maison, d’un canal ou d’un chemin de fer, je consulte celle de l’architecte ou de l’ingénieur. Pour telle science spéciale, je m’adresse à tel savant. Mais je ne m’en laisse imposer ni par le cordonnier, ni par l’architecte, ni par le savant. Je les écoute librement et avec tout le respect que méritent leur intelligence, leur caractère, leur savoir, en réservant toutefois mon droit incontestable de critique et de contrôle. » Quelques mots clés : céçuikidikiyéisme, ultracrépidarianisme, paralogisme, liberté d’expression, humilité, l’argumentum ad hominem, l’effet Dunning-Kruge, pédantisme, gloriole intellectuelle, complotisme, biais cognitif et effet de mode