An amateur isn't really someone who knows nothing about a particular subject. On the contrary, every amateur by definition knows at least something about their subject matter. An amateur is simply someone who engages that subject in a non-paid capacity, for personal enjoyment or some other reason. Indeed, amateurs can be, and many are, subject matter experts.
I'm referring to the SME term used in business scope. Where a SME is proven through some standardized way, that makes it impossible for someone not so vetted to have input. Amateur being someone who has interest and knowledge but doesn't meet the checklist to have an opinion.
Similar to what I was thinking amateur doesn't mean stupid or lazy it just means someone who has little or no experience (yet) but has an interest in the subject.
I wouldn't even go this far. An amateur can have tons of experience, and even be an expert in their field. It's true, many people use the word "amateur" to mean unskilled, beginner, etc, but in actuality it's simply someone who engages in some activity for something other than payment. ("Amateur" means "lover of" in Old French, apparently.)
Darwin was an amateur. So was Einstein. And both were subject matter experts. It might help to remember that the root of "amateur" is "amator", lover. An amateur is one who does what they do out of love.
Amateur astronomers still make meaningful contributions, especially in the realm of variable stars.
Amateur archaeologists and paleontologists are often welcome at many digs. Not only are they free labor: they provide watchful eyes and minds.
This is a great way to explain why the term <subject matter expert> irritates me so much. Sometimes knowing nothing is a good thing.