In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to

make important contributions

The society imbibes methods of learning in a variety of ways. The
most prominent being the method of inquiry. In fact, this this is the
primary methodology through which the scientific community
advances. Various established institutions and organisations make use
of this method to gain an insight of the operations within the structure
of organisations. However, application of methodology of inquiry
requires preciseness and unambiguity in the process of inquiry. This is
the process where the experts outsmart the beginners with their in-
depth knowledge of the whereabouts of the structure of the
organizations. The beginners, being nave to the organization itself, fail
to understand the approach which governs the organization. The
experienced also have an authority which enables them to take
exacting measures in the process of inquiry, which, in turn, is reflected
in the greater efficiency in the governance of the field. With a devoted
labour at hand, the experts have a good claim to credit for important
contributions in any field of inquiry.
Consider for example, the field of politics. It is not unusual to
observe that the elite positions in the assembly being held by veteran
leaders than the newbies. The seasoned politicians are well aware of
the emotional status of the subjects they are about to address and are
able to manipulate the same. They leave no stone unturned when it
comes to the sentiments of the subjects. The newbies on the other
hand, have a committed views of the stigmas prevailing the locality and
tend to impose their outlooks, ignoring what the subjects have to say.
This usually has an adverse effect on the society and could be
compared to an ersatz version of dictatorship itself. A look at the
politics of the world provides us ample examples where the amateurs
have failed to win the accolades of the community they lead and in
which case, the seasoned politicians have taken over.
Another instance where the experts triumph the contributions in
the field of inquiry is science and research. It is quite natural that the
experienced erudite have a more empirical knowledge than the
neophytes, being in the field of research for ages. It is only an inference
that the experienced researchers have a non-prejudiced mindset
enabling them to arrive at a conclusion based on the observations
rather than bigotry as a novice usually would. Taking an insight at the
overwhelming contributions made by researchers reveals that almost
all of them were seasoned experts in their fields with profound
knowledge in their field of study, be it Einstein, Newton or even
Stephen Hawking. This is enough an evidence to support the claim that
crucial contributions are accredited to the trained experts than the
beginners.
Some, on the contrary argue that the beginners are well equipped
with the scientific advancements in the field that the experts. This
argument holds good to same extent. But, given that the organisations
and governments aid the field with current advancements, the experts
leave no scope to be threatened by the beginners. And this is the trend
we observe in the present scenario. On the contrary, the beginners
usually work with the experts until the gain a certain in-depth
knowledge of the field they adhere. It may then be a good start for the
amateurs to have a progressive career in any field that necessitates
inquiry.
The above instances back my stance in ascertaining that the experts
have a greater say in the field of inquiry. The beginners, though quite
with a reasoning mindset, will have a greater say only when they are
acquainted with the knowledge that their field necessitates. A
promising scope for any field of inquiry would be when the experts
contribute their knowledge combined with the zeal and smartness of
the beginners. As stated, the experts and beginners need to make a
joint contribution to have a noticeable contribution in any field of
inquiry.