Second hand research

[DavidC]

If you were going to study something like the clan system in Iraq, or family and law in ancient Rome, it's obviously faster to get someone else's research on the subject. In the case of Iraq, it's safer too. In the case of myself, it's not just those two things, but also the fact that the person doing the research is going to be a lot smarter / better educated than me, too, so they'll most likely find the relevant information a lot better than I would, and be able to determine what's most relevant better.

However, it kinda bothers me to take someone else's research and opinions/conclusions on that research at face value. We all know that stats can be easily misinterpreted or manipulated to fit a thesis, people have their own political agendas, etc.

I'm just curious if anyone has any opinions on this, or knows where there's been accidental or purposeful lies in academia.

Thanks,
Dave.

[Shadowrun]

This is a pretty serious topic. I am curious why you think the original researcher is a lot smarter/better educated.

In some areas where you have no expertise, yes obviously you go with the experts, but there are a lot of things left on Earth where original research is still needed.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
I am curious why you think the original researcher is a lot smarter/better educated.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have a university degree. Generally they would. Maybe not smarter, but definitely better educated.