Matt Meister does my laundry. That’s right, the KRDO weatherman can put a mean crease on a cotton shirt. For my weather forecast I rely on my mechanic. And, when I need my car worked on — you guessed it — the woman who runs the local laundry works wonders with a wrench.

These statements are ridiculous, but they do point out a characteristic of modern societies, that people possess various abilities. Indeed, societies are based on the differentiation of skills. So, I’d be foolish to expect my laundress to do as well fixing my car as my mechanic, or that Matt could do as good a job at dry cleaning as my laundress. Similarly, I’d be foolish to think that I know more about the weather than Matt, more about how to fix my car than my mechanic, or more about dry cleaning than my laundress. In a complex world, we are foolish to think that we know more than the experts.

And yet I bet many of you chaffed at that last remark. Many people view the opinion of experts with skepticism. Why? Do we deny that others might know more about something than we do?

Perhaps it is simply that people discount the opinions of experts because it often runs counter to their own beliefs. In the public sphere for instance, many politicians and pundits deride the opinions of experts when those opinions are in conflict with their own. Are they and we just being childish by denying that we could be wrong?

One reason we may be so skeptical of expert opinion is in how we obtain it. For example, the news media sometimes use battling experts to generate controversy. By covering both sides of a story, the media often uses experts with disparate opinions. This gives impression that the experts are divided on a subject, when in fact there may be considerable consensus among them on a particular point. In these instances, the public would be better served if the news media sought the consensus of experts rather than stage gladiatorial expert contests.

Another problem is that other people’s expertise can cost us. People who have expertise can use that expertise at your expense. For instance, in most economic transactions the seller generally knows more about the value of an item than the buyer does. (Anyone who has ever purchased a used car knows this.) There is little wonder that we worry about whether we are being ripped off whenever an expert is “selling” us something.

But if you are basing your skepticism of all experts on these facets of modern life, you’re being insufficiently critical of the distinctions that can be made among various fields of experts. One way of deciding whether to heed an expert’s advice is to ask yourself: does this person stand to gain anything by misinforming me? Take Matt Meister and his fellow TV weather-persons as an example; do they gain anything by misinforming us about tomorrow’s forecast? They don’t. In fact, their credibility rests on their ability to accurately predict the weather. Weathermen may not always be right, but they are more accurate than not, and a whole lot better than your local mechanic at predicting weather — no matter how honest he/she is. So there is absolutely no gain for Matt or any of his colleagues to give you anything less than the most accurate weather forecast they can.

So it is with many areas of expertise. For many experts, their credibility rests in giving their best advice. Whether it is scientists warning of the effects of climate change or economists on the effects of defaulting on our loan obligations, there is no gain for these experts in lying.So next time you hear the advice of an expert, ask yourself: does this person stand to gain by misinforming me? If they don’t, then listen carefully.

By the way Matt, next time, not so much starch in those shirts.

ROTC Cadet Nick Lucca attended the Leader’s Training Course at Fort Knox, Ky., in June. He’s a 2009 graduate of St. Mary’s High School in Colorado Springs and attends DePauw University. Photo by STEVEN M. WARD/Special to The Gazette