Humans’ Standards for “Best Living” comes from their own minds and/or from the God they select to follow. The Spiritual God worshipped in African Tradition is Knowable with Certainty by what is Seeable in Nature. Others claim their God is Supernatural—either an individual or too remote to know about—either for bad or good. Out of a similar Supernatural pattern, humans’ standards are used to designate “Experts”. The Middle English root ‘experiri’ (‘to try out’) gave rise to “Experience” (trying out something for oneself); “Experiment” (a try out or test); and “Expert” (one who has successfully tried out or experienced something thoroughly). In 1384, “Expert” meant very skillful, experienced in, having experience of; in 1420, one wise through experience; and in 1868, “Expertise,” special Knowledge in apprasing or reporting in any field. Today, Experts are deemed to show mastery or demonstrate extraordinary skill–with distinguished achievements–in execution, performance, or technique in a subject, art, or profession. In legal settings, an Expert—as I was in the Medico-Legal arena–is one selected to give opinions on points in issue on what one is pecularly conversant and not within common knowledge. Dictionary writers—even those dealing with lexicons (vocabulary on a particular subject)–are called Lexicographers (C17, about writing words), Etymologists, Glossarians, Philologians, Vocabulists, Wordsmiths, and many others. They deal with such references as dictionaries, glossaries, thesauruses, synonym guides, usage guides, concordances, or, as I do, Word Stories. Two kinds of lexiography are: Alphabetical and Thematic (arranging words by themes or topics, usually with an index (e.g. Thesaurus). These may be books about words (e.g. dictionaries), about things (encyclopedias), or, like mine, mixtures. Hence, those setting up words for public use are called “Experts”—defined in European dictionaries as one who has special knowledge or skill—a specialist as a result of training, practice, or experience. While any of these may or may not be true, within their area of expertize it is extremely common for Experts to leave out words too complex for them. Or, the included information is not comprehensive from its beginning origin to the present. Or, only part of a word’s “big picture” is present—thus giving incomplete information about the “umbrella” (all aspects) of a word on any plane of existence and/or on different planes of existence. Also, what they do say is opinionated.
In the Supernatural: (1) there is no sound base on which to build a Thought Structure; (2) its eliminating the Spiritual–where Reality starts and where the Metaphysical makes it into Form; (3) it fits every word concept and meaning into Physical Planes of existence so as to be characterized by constant change; and (4) by the Greek Pythagoras (582-500 BC) teaching European males they were the “Measure of all things” and there could be no higher truth than what each White male determined it to be. Thus, Unconditional Love, Truth, Reality, and the Natural concepts cannot exist. Even in the simple relaying of factual historical information, original scribes’ recordings and those, throughout the ages, who did subsequent transcribing, all engaged in pseudepigraphic writings—i.e. stories falsely attributed to Biblical characters or times. In the process, scribes typically altered original stories according to their own opinions. Of particular interest to me are "Detour" Concepts occurring in the course of a word's history.
All of this gives me and scholars increased understanding of topics. That allows me to arrange “skeletal bones" in better order and research for missing ones. Note the Flaws: “Authorities” are spoken about in the form of: “Plato said or Decartes said”—but how do we know that is simply not their opinions, filled with bias and prejudices? Plato got his well-known information from African Sages but his presented non-African acquired information, by my assessment, makes no sense. Thus, no Base means either “Detours” are absent or, if present, are of questionable credibility. To what standards are “Authorities” and “Experts” held as, for example, those saying the world was flat? This was contrary to known Ancient African Knowledge. Or, based on his expertise on ancient documents and biblical genealogies, the Irish Archbishop James Ussher (1581–1656) estimated that our planet was created in the morning of October 23, 4004 BC. Now, Europeans know better. These are some reasons I avoid Europeans' opinions on anything since they are typically incomplete, weak, limited, facades, racially/ethnocentrically biased, conflicting, and/or mostly simply wrong! jabaileymd.com