Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field

Essay topics:

Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.

An expert is someone deemed to the top in his field and as such they have the requisite knowledge and experience to provide insightful and critical judgement. Further, a novice in the field with no experience will not be able to provide any critical insights, so their judgement will have miniscule value. As such, it is common to think that only experts will provide valuable critical judgement about their relevant fields. However, I vehemently disagree with this line of thinking and support the argument that experts are not the only ones who can provide valuable judgement. My dissent is supported by two key reasons.

Firstly, a novice from another field can bring a unique perspective to the field. There is critical value in bringing insights from a different field, that might at first glance seem irrelvant. For example, Steve Jobs who was not an expert programmer brought some of the most fundamental changes to the field of word processing. Because of his outsider perspective and wide range of knowledge of different fields including calligraphy, he was able to identify the deficiencies in word processing software back in the days; cluncky and ugly. This led to the subsequent introduction of fonts into the technical word processing space. The gorgeous fonts you see today are the result of an outsider's judgement of an expert's work. As such, there is value of an outsider whereby they can bring in relevant insights from a different field.

Secondly, experts tend to have boxed-in thinking and an outsider can help jolt the creative juices of the experts. For example, Steve Jobs was infamous of dropping an early iPhone prototype into water and pointing out the bubbles coming out of the phone was indicative of the possibility to shrink the components even further despite his top engineers' dissent. He was not an engineer and could be called an amateur at best, but he was still able to identify deficiences that the top brilliant minds couldn't. By being an outsider, his thinking was not boxed into what the experts are the time thought was "the edge of possibility". As such, outsiders can and have provided critical judgement into fields, where they were not experts in, and have contributed greatly to the advancement of the field, so critical judgement should not be just be the purview of experts.

However, some may argue that certain professionals like lawyers and doctors are so specialized that there is no role a novice can play in such niche fields. This cannot be further from the truth. With increasing technological advances, computer programmers are encroaching into such specialized fields. For example Google has built an artifical intelligent program that could remove bias and provide a more accurate diagonisis from MRI scans than even the most seasoned doctors. In such cases, an outsider can demonstrate the value their insights can bring to the table.

To sum up, outsiders be they novice from another field or a complete upstart could potentially provide insightful critical judgements. As such, their judgements should not be discounted. Experts may be the leading authorities in their field, but they too can be blinded a peripheral perspective and pre-existing biases. And in such cases, a novice or upstart can provide the valuable insights to help jolt the advancement of the field.

Votes
Average: 6.6 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 687, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'outsiders'' or 'outsider's'?
Suggestion: outsiders'; outsider's
...onts you see today are the result of an outsiders judgement of an experts work. As such, ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 500, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...eficiences that the top brilliant minds couldnt. By being an outsider, his thinking was...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, for example, to sum up

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2806.0 2235.4752809 126% => OK
No of words: 549.0 442.535393258 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11111111111 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84053189512 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79907331641 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 215.323595506 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451730418944 0.4932671777 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 860.4 704.065955056 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.4968948603 60.3974514979 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.923076923 118.986275619 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1153846154 23.4991977007 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.46153846154 5.21951772744 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.27376775266 0.243740707755 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0859648446656 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0675096132269 0.0758088955206 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.160782408536 0.150359130593 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0791044527528 0.0667264976115 119% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 100.480337079 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.