“An expert! An expert, my kingdom for an expert to prove to me is good!” No, King Richard wanted a horse. But today the public and political warriors need something more modern than the horse to run rough shod their opponents. You need an expert. Expert is very useful for people to have, or mount, you will learn from existing on demand. This is even more useful, even an expert. You can rely on the knowledge to play well outside the field of useful knowledge – Ask Dr. Laura, or Al Gore. Know-how is very valuable, even necessary, in a variety of human effort. Want to build a better microprocessor? Hire own fleet of electrical and computer engineers. Do you pay taxes you owe and not one cent more? Renting books. Want to imperial hegemonic discourse ways to understand the state has dominated the post-colonial state? Employing an assistant professor of English non-Western literature. . . please? We need a lot of experts to achieve our main goal. To collect, filter and organize new knowledge, basic research to have engineers new opportunities for a better understanding of human nature and the world we live in, experts trained in narrow specialties that they can do in the original, things are creative. Expertise is often accompanied by the experience, dedication and devotion. But there are limits to utility experts. Experts are shallow. Experts are elitist and authoritarian. Experts can be bought. Specialists can be very distorted and ideological. Experts can be so stupid and not perfect like everyone else. Differences of opinion of experts can stick and scare lies in obedience. Experts and expertise can be a double-edged sword, especially in the field of civil society. We need experts for many things, but we are not experts about our chances – our responsibility – to the world as an intelligent, passionate, commitment-citizen information. Yes, we have to break the tyranny of specialists to store and actively trying to our corner of the world one idea at the time. Expert Tyranny Experts maintain authority. Their coverage, rates, publications, their experiences and demonstrate to all people and to increase their authority. We listen to them and to trust them and pay, because they speak authoritatively about things that we are not sure of ourselves. But the authority of the experts can extend further. Expertise can be a club to club difference of opinion, it can be a shield against criticism, they can bring the muzzle to silence debate and create apathy. In addition, experts are often far from the target. On the contrary, they are often very ideological. Consideration of experts who can cause such excessive tyranny. Sometimes the experts know what we are doing. But in cases of civil society, there is little they know that you are not, and in any event, they can replace your presence in the public debate. Experts held strong ideological positions. They are not objective, and few would argue, when they ask. When an expert claims of objectivity, they tend to try with their authority to convince you of a powerful ideology. Experts often ideological, precisely because they are experts. Why should you be in 3 or 5 or 8 years, obtained a PhD in some narrow areas or problems if you are not eager to start with? This is often not the money, because there is an easy way to make money. That’s because they really care. They take care of when they begin their training, and make further research, training and experience, dedicated to passion. But sometimes, the experts used their professional status to protect the ideology. When the distinguished professor of biophysics in front of you stood up and spoke passionately about the impact of greenhouse gases on sea temperatures, remember that at heart, the environment, long before he started graduate school, and all of their degrees, which was approved by the BMBF, the field of learning and teaching workshop reinforced ideological. None of these claims makes it wrong, but he admitted ideological positions. The experts are also usually very stubborn and uncompromising. Science and Higher Education’s emphasis on flexibility, tolerance and willingness to change the conclusions when viewing the new data. But the experts know a lot of things. Your confidence is very complex, sophisticated and mature. And, as already mentioned, they are very confident in the philosophical and ideological systems. You are not familiar with changing their minds, and they are not willing to bend without a lot of convincing to do. These people are not students find themselves and their world again. This is the doctor who has been found. For this reason, minutes of the debate about the differences of opinion among experts in the field, can be very bitter. Experts surround themselves with symbols of authority. If the question is raised, they sometimes make mistakes in the back of the shield of knowledge or office, and join in the discussion or debate. In the modern world we are egalitarian, only a few people who understand the hierarchy better than the experts. Assistant professor of challenges in a chair or dean of their danger. Lawyers took the judge. If the Senate staff of a minister of the attack, he better do so with anonymous comments. Even in the authoritarian classroom, many students learn lessons very unfortunate that some lecturers did not remain in question, or by graduate students concerned. Anyone who has a card game of “playing war” know that a queen, two punch. A natural reaction to criticism, legitimacy, publications, experience, or in the office of critic questions. Expert critics are not good scientists, they are not visible outside the scientific consensus, they have the evidence or secret documents, they do not understand the theory. Here are often understood, jargon invite their position is for the poor, the subject of the second year dared to cross the street to the doctor. In this way, know-how to limit debate and dissent. It is used to make the experts believe, quiet, obedient, and finally apathy. Quoting experts and expertise What large number of leading experts around us is that he must do some very important things that the experts and can not. There are some basic limits of knowledge. First, experts are often superficial or obvious. Do you really need an expert with the federal subsidies to inform you that the kids will find a beautiful Rembrandt or Bach? What would you without the experts who say that too little sleep to make driving more dangerous to be done? How many different committees must redefine the food pyramid? – And they still can not what your mother knew exactly agrees: “Do you eat vegetables and then go out and play!” Of course, not all experts are clear conclusion. But many expensive lab has been funded to explore and document the obvious. Second, and more care, experts are often used to show, as the truth, a very controversial claim. Expert says: “zero tolerance enforcement leads to lower crime rates.” Well, you can agree or disagree with this statement. And it does not matter a bit, the experts say so. This is a contested result. In both cases, whether the expert is debatable conclusions shallow or completely, do not change our view of the world. Next, know-how, basically limited. Experts are dedicated to something specific and narrow. You can not be an expert on many. That does not stop some experts claim that they speak authoritatively about what they want. But they really only experts in a narrow range. Civil society demands that all people, good – they are experts in some narrow or not – offer a variety of topics. I happened to be a historian of the field. But be sure I believe that we all must be involved, and talk and hear about the whole range of issues that shape our world in particular. When I engage in public debate about the social or political or ideological issues of business, which requires no degree of care, what I have. I speak as someone who engaged in civil discourse. A broad spectrum of civil society should not be supported with professional degrees, title, office or small know-how to be tilted. Above all, know-how and qualifications do not give wisdom, ethics, responsibility, morality and brotherly love. Experts are people – like you. Experts can be proud, elitist and demeaning. As already mentioned, they can put to use ad hominem attacks when asked. They are often biased. Basically, they know-how they are not hidden answers to difficult problems in the region, where the company has a priority, or how tax money should be spent, or where you have to choose. Position as the likely stupid, confused, irresponsible and selfish, like all others. Your ideas, ideals, or ideological positions can be interesting, useful, effective and visionary. But its status as an expert witness has no effect on them. In relation to civil society, judge the quality of their ideas – no more, no less. There are also some very basic things that experts can be done. 1 – The experts can not predict the future. You can not. An expert who claims to predict the future, whether he or she is a biologist, an economist or a historian who is a fraud. 2 – The experts were unable to send a fundamental, moral decisions on matters of public policy. They contribute as citizens of your community and the nation’s responsibility alone. 3 – The experts can not and will never form the substance and character of civil society. Functional civil society should be formed by the widest possible range of trained, committed, involved, principled, citizen information. And in the absence of well-trained, committed, involved, principled, citizen information, you and I need the best we can, together with all other people do. Another option is the oligarchic rule of the experts and elites, which is the antithesis of civil society. Unfortunately, development experts and their dependence actually harming civil society through the spread of apathy, passive, voluntary disenfranchisement and silence. Emancipation Civil Society We live in the universe expands. Our society is facing major changes, big challenges and unique opportunities. Technological, social, political and economic changes in our offer for innovation and impact. To manage the opportunity, but also to detect and to solve the problem, we need to build stronger communities involved citizens. Among the new opportunities the Internet provides a new space to speak to us and interesting new ways to broadcast our voice. Healthy civil society must be freed from experts to enable the widest possible participation. Civil society activism, public debate and good governance should be practiced, not taught or learned. Problems and opportunities that require complex involvement and commitment to an expert, civil society responsibility. We must be willing to examine and evaluate the various positions. We must be willing to argue against, and eventually compromise. Experts often required for this process. But they should not dominate, and we can not passively transfer process to the experts. Large, diverse, engaged citizenship is more valuable than some experts. Our society will have the combined wisdom, energy, interest and enthusiasm of the masses. We live in the universe expands. There is room in the expanding universe for all of us involved and to speak and act. But the mechanization of specialization and expansion of the universe can be daunting. Experts can reinforce this fear – to harm all. We can not allow the experts to determine the expansion of the universe.