This seems to assume that experts' advice can only be valued (or not) as an appeal to authority. But that would ignore that experts can also provide _explanations_: "This won't work because this subsystem would violate the laws of physics" e.g. -- and that explanation might then spur someone to find an equivalent subsystem without that flaw, or perhaps one would find a flaw in the initial reasoning, or whatever.
Similarly, seeing a list of past failures may inspire variations that seek to overcome the shortcoming without having to waste time first reproducing the same failure. One can try to learn _why_ it failed and use that to guide future attempts.
The advice to be wary of experts reminds me of the advice to avoid criticism while brainstorming, the idea in common being that criticism and negativity supposedly stifles creativity. However, it turns out that criticism _enhances_ the brainstorming process https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/should-we-allo... It seems that criticism from expertise could similarly be a boon to future advances.
Similarly, seeing a list of past failures may inspire variations that seek to overcome the shortcoming without having to waste time first reproducing the same failure. One can try to learn _why_ it failed and use that to guide future attempts.
The advice to be wary of experts reminds me of the advice to avoid criticism while brainstorming, the idea in common being that criticism and negativity supposedly stifles creativity. However, it turns out that criticism _enhances_ the brainstorming process https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/should-we-allo... It seems that criticism from expertise could similarly be a boon to future advances.