It could be. “Experts” tend to have to have biases, particularly confirmation bias, and since the number of experts is so small, those biases have an outsized effect.
Millions of people might see things more balanced, because the sample is so large. With so little economic growth in the EU, I don’t see the advantage of belonging to it. If the pie never really gets bigger, then if I take something, someone else loses. Zero sum. If the pie is growing, then if I take something, no one loses, there is still more pie. If Eastern European workers move to GB, EE loses productivity.
I think Brexit will be a success.
Yeah, those experts are experts for a reason. They devote a considerable amount of their lives to studying history, numbers, science and so on. They make predictions based of data for a living. So yes. They do have biases. Even confirmation biases. Though not in the way crowds think about those words.
Having a bias or being bias right from the gate isn't the end of the world. That would be like dismissing a cop's suggestions on how a real cop behaves by the book while making a movie based on cops because they are in fact a cop. Then going to a crowd of people and asking how a cop does things by the book and making your movie based off that.
It's the literal definition of stupidity.
Now, it can be understandable if a person doesn't trust the opinion of an expert because they have biases elsewhere. Say asking a cop about police brutality while knowing they have a history of complaints from people about said cop abusing them.
You said nothing about that though. All you said was...
(“Experts” tend to have to have biases, particularly confirmation bias, and since the number of experts is so small, those biases have an outsized effect.)
...which labels all experts in existence not only in the same way but with the same negative connotations. Like saying all white men are racists.
It is very possible for an expert to be bias toward previously found information presented by those in their field. The scientific method. If for forty years scientists have said climate change is real. Then of course another scientist will be bias toward that same finding. Not just because another scientist or many have confirmed it but because they've confirmed it themselves.
Again. You didn't even attempt to address this.
Same goes with confirmation bias. An expert could look for the same results a previous expert has found. Simple to confirm it.
Which is something else you never bothered to once address. Facts. You were so overly concerned with bias that you forgot to address what the facts of brexit were or the facts that have been found about brexit. Which is telling.
Lets break this down a little further though. Your opinion here is....
group think + no evidence > experts + evidence
That doesn't seem right to me. Does it seem right to you?
