Scientific Consensus and Expert Testimony in Courts: Lessons from the Bendectin Litigation |
| |
Authors: | Boaz Miller |
| |
Institution: | 1.Department of Philosophy, The Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas,Tel Aviv University,Tel Aviv,Israel;2.The Graduate Program in STS,Bar Ilan University,Ramat Gan,Israel |
| |
Abstract: | A consensus in a scientific community is often used as a resource for making informed public-policy decisions and deciding between rival expert testimonies in legal trials. This paper contains a social-epistemic analysis of the high-profile Bendectin drug controversy, which was decided in the courtroom inter alia by deference to a scientific consensus about the safety of Bendectin. Drawing on my previously developed account of knowledge-based consensus, I argue that the consensus in this case was not knowledge based, hence courts’ deference to it was not epistemically justified. I draw sceptical lessons from this analysis regarding the value of scientific consensus as a desirable and reliable means of resolving scientific controversies in public life. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|