Non-sequitor. Just because some people have more experience, etc. it does not therefore follow logically that they should rule others with less experience. Certainly, they can give advice to the less experienced and they may be well advised to follow it but if the more experienced person tells them to do something moronic then they shouldn't have to. There's a big difference between authority in the sense of knowing a lot and authority in the sense of a ruler/ruled relationship.
"In the matter of boots, I refer to the authority of the bootmaker; concerning houses, canals, or railroads, I consult that of the architect or engineer. For such and such knowledge I apply to such and such a specialist. But I allow neither the bootmaker nor the architect nor the specialist to impose his authority on me. I listen to them freely and with all the respect merited by their intelligence, their character, and their knowledge, though reserving always my incontestable right of criticism and censure." - Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State
> Is it, for example, intolerable coercion, in some ultimate sense "at gunpoint," if a senior scientist,
let's say, assigns her grad students to do a lot of boring scut work in the lab?
Why should the boring work be imposed on the grad student and not split equally?
-- Joe R. Golowka Anarchist FAQ -- http://www.anarchyfaq.org
"The beauty of the democratic systems of thought control, as contrasted with their clumsy totalitarian counterparts, is that they operate by subtly establishing on a voluntary basis--aided by the force of nationalism and media control by substantial interests--presuppositions that set the limits of debate, rather than by imposing beliefs with a bludgeon. Then let the debate rage; the more lively and vigorous it is, the better the propaganda system is served, since the presuppositions (U.S. benevolence, lack of rational imperial goals, defensive posture, etc.) are more firmly established. Those who do not accept the fundamental principles of state propaganda are simply excluded from the debate (or if noticed, dismissed as "emotional," "irresponsible," etc.)." - Noam Chomsky