Implications Regarding the Crisis of Expertise
For a moment let’s consider what the conclusions reached by Duckitt means regarding the crisis of expertise. First, there appears to be a tendency among some people to form a single unified perspective regarding the society in which they live. Furthermore, as the name “authoritarian” implies, this unified perspective is often aligned with (and even formed by) someone or some organization that claims authority in this society. This means that those with an Authoritarian personality are likely to look only to those experts who are in powerful positions (authority) or proclaim their affiliation with some greater power (such as a divine entity). Duckitt conclusion also includes the assumption that this authoritarian perspective is deeply engrained in the “personality” (trait) of this person—meaning that this perspective is not easily changed and experts from outside this authoritarian’s ”silo of authority” are never going to be listened to or welcomed in.
As we look beyond Duckitt’s conclusions, we find that many of the studies of the authoritarian personality link this trait specifically to Ethnocentrism. An authoritarian is likely to be looking only to those experts “who are one of us” There is not much room for diversity in the authoritarian’s silo. Experts from “outside” cultures, who are of the “wrong” color or sexual orientation need not apply. There is also very little tolerance for experts who present a nonstandard ability/disability profile or admit to (let alone advocate) a “deviant” religious belief. Once again, as part of an enduring trait, this biased perspective regarding people who are “different” is likely to dramatically restrict the range of expert-based information that the authoritarian will receive and accept.
There is more to add here. Misanthropy is typically associated with the authoritarian personality trait. Those who are “different’ from the authoritarian will be not only ignored. They will also be despised—and even hated. Consequently, the authoritarian will be looking only to those experts who speak negatively of most (if not all) human beings who differ in virtually any way from themselves. It is particularly important to note that those who embrace a misanthropic mistrust or hatred of most people tend to focus on the inanimate rather than the animate (living beings). They love machines and ignore children. They take care of the car but not their parents. When choosing an expert, the misanthrope (and the authoritarian) is likely to choose someone who bangs into other people (an aggressive athlete) or knows their way around weapons and warfare.
There is also the matter of rigidity—another of enduring characteristics often associated with the authoritarian personality. Those people who exhibit this trait are likely to stick with the same expert regardless of their lack of knowledge about a specific area of concern for the authoritarian. A desire for continuity will be given highest priority when selecting and listening to someone purporting to be an “expert.” A lack of appropriate expertise is assigned very little value. Dogmatism is closely related to authoritarian rigidity. This means, once again, that the authoritarian is likely to look only to those experts who share a set of core beliefs. With this rigidity and dogmatism comes a cycle of positive feedback regarding beliefs. The authoritarian looks for an expert with shared beliefs and the expert will, in turn, provide information that confirms the belief, thus further fortifying this belief. With the belief even more fully entrenched, the authoritarian will become even more rigidly committed to this expert. More begets more.
