Academic Credentials

[NoaRiver2020]

Why is it a negative thing to lack academic credentials? For instance, like Erik H. Erikson?

[woofgang]

according to Wikipedia he did have academic credentials.

[jim360]

No Bachelor's Degree, though.

I'm not sure it's necessarily a negative thing. Any argument can, and should, primarily be evaluated on its content, not on its speaker. On what is said, rather than who is saying it. All the same, authoritative experts on a given subject are likely to have researched extensively in it for a while, picking up academic credentials along the way.

It's a very difficult balance to find, here. As a rough rule of thumb, it's worth at least initially giving more attention to the opinion of those with relevant academic credentials than those without, because they are more likely to have an idea about the subject matter. A balance of probability isn't the same as certainty, though. It's important always, as far as possible, to evaluate the message yourself, on objective grounds. What is being said? Is the argument logically coherent? Does the evidence presented support it? Is this in line with consensus position? If not, what are the answers to the same questions when applied to the consensus?

[woofgang]

of course the other thing is that if you are the first, or among the first, in a field, then who will teach you and examine you?