Local experts contradict each other when each has interests at stake.

Evidence

The old hunter acrimoniously said he “must speak the truth,” the miner was directing me over a track where for twenty-five miles there was not a house, and where, if snow came on, I should never be heard of again. The miner said he “must speak the truth,” the hunter was directing me over a pass where there were five feet of snow, and no trail. — Isabella L. Bird, A Lady’s Life in the Rocky Mountains, 183

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes the Milgrom/Champagne Fairs material on reputation and self-interested testimony — here expertise is undone by conflicting incentives rather than missing information. — connects to: Conflicting expert claims make it hard to know how much trust to vest. — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 354; Theorists’ political loyalties and productive interests can violently contradict each other; Direct confrontation between philosophers can leave both parties puzzled and affronted — Sarah Bakewell, At the Existentialist Café: Freedom,…, 279 (+16 more)
• SEED: An essay on how contradictory local advice is a signal of conflicting utility, not of insufficient knowledge — travel-writing angle.

Broader Connections

• Conflicting expert claims make it hard to know how much trust to vest. #corroborates (1.00) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 354
• Theorists’ political loyalties and productive interests can violently contradict each other #corroborates (1.00)
• Economists obscuring knowledge during crisis stems from contradicting logics of expertise and market faith #corroborates (1.00) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 655
• Mutual accusations of folly can leave both parties equally unconvinced #corroborates (1.00) — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 1350
• Modern intellectual disputes also reject shared facts and caricature adversaries #corroborates (1.00) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1381
• True thinking requires an internal dialogue among conflicting viewpoints. #corroborates (1.00) — Jordan B. Peterson, 12 Rules for Life An Antidote to Chaos, 727
• Direct confrontation between philosophers can leave both parties puzzled and affronted #complicates (0.80) — Sarah Bakewell, At the Existentialist Café, 279
• Experts can badly misjudge a region’s strategic importance to global powers #complicates (0.70)
• Conspiracism undermines rather than expresses democratic skepticism about experts #complicates (0.70) — Russell Muirhead and Nancy L. Rosenblum, A Lot of People Are Saying, 269
• Challenging expert claims requires refusing the expert’s framing language entirely #complicates (0.70) — The Friends of Attention, Attensity!, 148
• Legal critique often masks a disagreement over underlying value judgments. #complicates (0.70) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 451
• People hold logically contradictory beliefs when elements aren’t subjectively linked. #complicates (0.70)
• Expert professionals can perpetuate unfounded beliefs through their actions. #complicates (0.70) — Lynley Hood, A City Possessed, 1602
• People readily hold mutually contradictory conspiracy beliefs simultaneously. #complicates (0.70) — Anna Merlan, Republic of Lies, 94
• Policies addressing one marginalized group frequently contradict policies for other groups #complicates (0.70) — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 135