I believe I understand your initial pause. Given the sheer amount of information.. you’re saying that allowing a “trusted” group to act as an arbiter is simply more efficient and maybe a requirement for productive discourse? Convenience vs full responsibility?
Not intentioned as an argument. Hopefully not read as such.
Yes, I think there are cases where that's the case :) For example when designing a nuclear plant I think relying on a group of nuclear physicists and engineers is a good idea.
No one in a world has capacity to know all there is to know in the world (this is somewhat new phenomenon - it has been true for the last couple of centuries) and so we need to have division of responsibilities.
But maybe I'm pulling this topic from a different corner than you are?
We all come from different corners! The point is more than valid. I’m only advocating for increased individual responsibility. I think we agree.
