That's not how historians are organized or how history is studied.Paul the Uncertain wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:16 pmI don't know how you do things in Australia. In the United States, medical advice is professionally dispensed by physicians, physician's assistants, nurse practitioners, midwives, registered nurses, and in some cases, pharmacists (although not to the same extent as pharmacists are consulted in some places in Europe). Probably there are others I'm not thinking of, but you get the idea.Doctors for medicine
Which type of provider somebody consults depends in large part on what information or assistance is sought.
That seems to parallel the accommodation I am suggesting. If I have a question about the human past which a historian finds worthy of their attention, then I should consult a historian. But if I should happen to have some lesser question about the human past, one which historians find unworthy of their time or attention, then I'll have to seek my advice elsewhere or instead do without.
Why should I do without? What's the historians' objection if they don't sell what I want to buy and so I direct my custom to somebody who does sell it? I didn't remove them from the qualified vendor pool, they removed themselves.
But I dare say that all of those medical practitioners of various degrees all subscribe to common medical standards and none would professionally recommend a looney goo cure for a serious illness. In Australia, at least, there are national medical standards that all levels of practitioner are expected to abide by.
Hardly churlish but to the point I have been repeating here many times: biblical historians do not abide by the practices of normative historical methods and their claims to be historians (like other historians) is simply false. When it comes to certain historical topics a good many of them, though sincere, do indeed practice a form or history like charlatans, snake-oil salesmen, homeopaths, etc ... pretending to be "real historians". Hence some of those "real historians" roll their eyes in incredulity at some of their "methods".Paul the Uncertain wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:16 pmI suppose it would be churlish to point out the similarity between that and Professor McGrath's explanation of why people trained outside his special field should defer to him and his colleagues in the guild on Bible-related questions.if we think as laypersons we can do better and know more than any in their respective fields with understanding the principles involved in those special fields...
Regardless, directing my question to somebody willing and qualified to answer it is not a claim that I can do better or know more than anybody else about anything. Recognizing that a question is well-posed is not a competitive activity.