Ah, but, I don't write "to be an expert"... <g>

I write to:

clarify the way I think

!

So, what's the difference?

?

Well you see, if:

a) Someone writes something

and:

b) They are basically honest, at least with respect to themself, their own thoughts, in their own writings;

and

c) They are given a chance to review and edit and correct their own writings (in Law, we call this "Amending" something) after having written them;

Then, typically, as a result of these conditions:

d) They discover, and can subsequently think about, ("examine")

their own self-contradictions

...which if they are subsequently thought about, and subsequently resolved (again, in thought) -- will invariably lead to

better and clearer thinking...

We might call this the process of "self-examination" -- through writing...

I believe Socrates said something to the effect of "The unexamined life -- is not worth living".

Now, I don't know if that's true or not...

What I do know, is that I write to:

clarify the way I think

(And of course there are other reasons too, like communication, human communication... but it's not "to be an expert"... (What would I possibly gain from being "an expert", other than a title, a higher pay grade, and possibly more incompetency than the guy who's at the next pay grade higher than me? <g>))

(Oh, and sometimes I get good jokes, good humor, good comedy ideas -- from writing... but these are slag by-products of the writing process -- and not the norm...)

Anyway, that's why I do it...

Not "to be an expert"...

"The true knowledge -- consists in knowing that one knows nothing..."

-Socrates