pull down to refresh
Without the state, there isn't the same single superficially obvious grantor of credentials.
They'd have to be granted by independent credentialing agencies, which people wouldn't attach the same unearned infallibility to.
I dunno, I can think of the guilds of early modern Europe or the obsession with CFA today, neither of which are directly connected to/caused by a state.
My impression is that guilds tended to enjoy state granted monopolies on their trades.
So, that would be like saying the state has nothing to do with medical licensing, because that's done by the AMA (who have a state monopoly to certify doctors).
Sometimes.
I only got like ten pages into Ogilvie's mega treatise on the guilds, so I'll report back when I've prioritised it
(And since she's the top dog, Chichele(!) professor, at Oxford, her credentials are impeccable)
It's not a history I know well. I'm going off of what Stephen Kinsella has discussed in the history of state granted monopolies that led up to modern IP law.
It would make sense if he omitted autonomous guilds from that, since they would be peripheral to the ultimate point.
Would you say that CFA and craftsmen guilds before them represented empty credentials though?
Compared to say, a modern day Ed.D.?
CFA today is definitely quite empty (I have that on pretty good account from insiders). The impact of guilds is ~meh; a little bit of education/furthering knowledge but at the expense of shutting out others. Not empty, then, I guess
Moreover, the mechanics of the state requires credentialism (to a put an admittedly weak check on self dealing)
It stems as a necessary friction arising from the inefficiency of spending other people's money
Excited to read this... I hate credentialism with all my heart, but I seriously doubt it has a connection to/origin in the state.