[doctorpangloss]

I don’t think this is the “bitter medicine” or “hard truths” you think it is.

Separately, while it’s very interesting that you played a role in writing this, and I believe that you’re correct in general about the errors in the linked articles: despite the fact that you are highly experienced, there are still idiots who win court cases, even Supreme Court cases, on crap arguments, sometimes. However, idiots never become surgeons. In my personal experience, I don’t know any idiots who also write sophisticated software. So this idea that there is some kind of objective, apolitical correct interpretation of a statue - that the practice of law at the highest levels in trials in front of the Supreme Court has this major objective element to it as surgery and math does - is kind of bupkis, you are as much practicing something imaginary, subjective, political, and poetical as the musings of Alan Ginsburg as the professors do.

So what is your opinion: do you really think Supreme Court decisions are apolitical? How would you tell the difference between a politically motivated decision that uses your arguments as a “parallel construction” to support that political decision, and a sincere belief that your way of reading the statue is objective and apolitical? Because that is what people are pissed off about.

[defrost]

> However, idiots never become surgeons.

That would once have been taken as gospel, then came Ben Carson standing by his statement that Egyptian pyramids were built for grain storage.

In the medical world there are strong opinions as to whether the procedural dexterity inherent in excelling as a surgeon also requires better than average reasoning prowess.

[lupusreal]

That's a pretty crazy example but I can top it. I've met programmers who think that Communism works and that Stalin was an admirable guy. Honest to god tankies.

[mc32]

I mean, there are unlicensed surgeons, who, presumably are unlicensed for multiple reasons, but one might be not being able to get certain degrees from accredited institutions -so, yeah, idiots do become surgeons of a type.

[defrost]

Ben Carson is (or was, likely not practicing anymore, I'd have to check) an acclaimed brain surgeon. I do not intend to diminish that in any way whatsoever.

Carson has also uttered statements in total sincerity that boggle the minds of historians, physicists, and the generally logically inclined. When questioned he's doubled down on "reasoning" that is considered to be anything but.

It highlights that we as a whole need to consider our role models for various peaks of achievement; medicine is a hard degree, it takes epic feats of rote memorisation and recall of thick textbooks, the ability to associate collections of indicators with multitudes of potential causes, the ability to grind and grind hard long hours through residency.

Surgery, for some, is a turn away from diagnostics towards human carpentry .. with no disrespect to surgeons, that's a framing they've heard before and a number embrace.

[MisterBastahrd]

I think it's fairly obvious that the court system is more metaphysics than physics. Even when the laws are clear, we still have politically motivated jurists who will put their own denominational spin on the application of said laws.

[tpmoney]

>However, idiots never become surgeons.

Really? One need only look at lists of physicians whose medical licenses have been revoked or who have been sued for malpractice or abusing their patients to disabuse themselves of the notion that "idiots never become surgeons". Heck the history of medicine itself is instructive on that front. Education and success in a specific field does not preclude you from being an idiot in others or indeed even within your own field.