RE SPECIALIZED COMPARTMENTALIZED KNOWLEDGE ITS OWN CRITERION

One of the implications of differentiation and specialization of knowledge, is that, whatever it is, it tends often but not always, to need or want to get narrower still, within a given larger field, in order to get deeper still into a refined subject matter area. There are countervailing tendencies, which seem not to have been as strong.

We have seen a relentless march of specialization in many fields along these lines.

With this specialization, has come a self-authenticating system of validation for particular areas or subfields.

So the argument might go: Who knows more about the special validity or special qualifications or constraints of this particular subfield than its practitioners?

Medicine, many specialties and subspecialties, of anatomy, of systems, carving out niches for themselves against their neighbors, forensic areas in litigation fraught with difficulties, very common; often with not very good or helpful consequences for patients, clients, or the public.

Law, similar issues pervade the field.

Economics, self-authenticating pundits, traditionally narrow absolute presuppositions, dogmatism, and similar issues.

Other social sciences, sociology, psychology, anthropology, similarly.

Accounting, imploded recently, many subfields, consulting, etc., showing their colors.

Many areas of technical exact science research, particularly at universities endowed by private or various nations' money, handmaidens of particular industrial or national masters.

Many 'exact' sciences, especially their forensic areas, engineering of many specific types, handmaidens of other fields: politics, private industry, or law, and all three, quite often, in a given specialty.

Sometimes, where the stakes are high enough, industry, government, or law, commandeer various subspecialties in technical ensembles, often career forensic experts usually seen in disparate fields, harnessed toward a particular desired scientific, industry, or litigation outcome.

Another implication is that technical knowledge seems to need, to some extent at least, to get specific criteria of its own in order to validate its technical advances.