It really sucks to be an expert but then not be able to get others to take your expertise seriously. We can do a lot of things on our own, but we're all social beings who do need to interact with others around us.

It does really suck to be an expert but then be ignored or shunned by the people you consider your peers.

I think the OP is pretty chill and doesn't mean that having a PhD is equivalent to being technically superior (see the following quote).

> ... Meaning, it is entirely possible to get expert levels on a topic without getting the PhD certificate.

If I'm not mistaken, for the part that you quoted, the OP is pointing out that there are many people who assess whether or not you are an expert they are looking for base on just a piece of paper, regardless of whether or not your skills in that area is that expected of an expert.

When you are looking for a job, whether you give a damn or not doesn't matter, it's whether or not the interviewer gives a damn that matters—and I feel that most of them don't.

Exactly! But that was the point made, right? Regardless of your credentials you should be able to convince people that you are an expert in a field. If you can prove your expertise only through credentials and not actual expert knowledge that is the "false positive" mentioned in the comment.

As others have pointed out, I 100% agree with not giving a damn at an emotional level what other people think. I also think that proving how good you are is an essential part of getting a job, or being a intellectual leader etc.