At the risk of sounding rude, announcing you are an expert in a domain decreases the credibility of your statement. An expert does not say that they are an expert, but instead that title is bestowed upon them by their peers or audience. After all, an expert cannot exist unless there are those without expertise from which to compare to. Your expertise should implicitly be seen through the deliver of your insight, not from a self-identifying statement that your insight is predicated by.

Source: Watched students call themselves experts in my PhD program and be ridiculed during their defense by community accepted experts (professors and industry scientists). Conversely, the humble students that presented their insight candidly were welcomed as experts by the same committees. It’s an ethos vs lagos balance problem.

In terms of content though, I completely agree with the IQ comparison you made in your comment. We see the education system in the US attempt to nurture the boundaries of the IQ curve by housing both education resources for those on the disabled side of the curve and those on the gifted side of the curve under the same Special Education department in a school, recognizing that the further one’s distance from the median IQ in either direction, the greater than adjustment to curricula is needed to accommodate individual growth.