Bringing Mae Flowers

I know enough about many topics to know I’m not any expert on any.

Isn’t that what the Dunning-Kruger effect is about; knowing enough to know your limitations. It’s this paradox of understanding that leaves the most ignorant among us to be the most confident in their speech, while the most educated speak in uncertainties. The deeper you understand a topic, the more questions you have. And I feel that way about many things.

I am comfortable in that discomfort.

Once upon a time, I wanted to know things. I wanted to be the leading expert on something– anything. But now, I am comfortable being a life-time learner. I want to be curious. I want to be engaged. I want to question and explore without the pressure of being right.

No one talks about the anxiety of being an authority.

I am the resident expert on several subjects at my day job, and I hate it. Part of me is flattered, but that flattery is far overshadowed by the pressure to perform. Everyone expects me to know, so I’m faking confidence in answers that are merely speculation, and stating hypotheses as if they are fact. In reality, all I’m doing is spotting patterns and hoping the spots don’t change.

What makes someone an authority?

Maybe I am an authority on certain topics and I just have impostor syndrome. Is it a title you can give yourself, or is it something others need to acknowledge for you. Either way, what are the standards? Is the bar for being an authority on a topic is “knowing more than the average person”, or “having X number of years in the field”? Who gets to decide what the ruling is?

If it’s up to me, I’d say I’m not an authority on anything. And that’s how I want it to be.