Experts, including public health experts, often assume that the focus of their work constitutes the highest good in the hierarchy of human goods. Thus, economists assume utility-maximization, psychologists identify mental or emotion well-being, and public health experts focus on alleviating suffering and preventing death. These are all good, true, but expert advice on how to attain them functions best within a more integrated account of the good, one that is based on wisdom, not expertise.
One of the investors in a startup I founded told me once: "Everybody loves their own cows". He was explaining to me how it was possible that our CFO believed that we were actually in the "accounting business" even though we were actually selling internet services.
I think this article is fascinating and timely (it was published near the beginning of the pandemic.) I hear these comments about "follow the science" and "listen to the experts" but this article raises a crucial question: "Do the managerial experts performing within the drama of this crisis have an adequate understanding of the hierarchy of human goods?"
That's why the writer concludes that it's better to seek wisdom that consists of a more integrated understanding of what constitutes "the good", than the narrowly focused expertise represented by bureaucrats.
Nathan Pinkoski
