Yeah, I absolutely think non-experts should be able to voice their opinions and listen to. If you make a good argument and have good sources then your contribution is as good as anybody else.

My only caveat would be whether you go strongly against mainstream accepted knowledge or understanding. If you do and you are a non-expert then you need a very strong case and very good evidence. Otherwise people should not take you serious.

That is the problem with Jordan Peterson. He is a non-expert within climate science, and he pushes what is essentially fringe theories without solid backup.

I like to think that despite not being an expert in most of the things I write about, I am not pushing, odd controversial fringe theories. I try to stick to what is mainstream understanding.

In psychology Jordan Peterson pushes Karl Jung which by todays standards is kind of fringe. He believes in a lot New Age stuff which has no proper grounding in modern science. I feel too many are embracing Peterson because "he is owning the libs" rather than necessarily a genuinly sound insight.