Proposals for Change

• Author: Alan D. Gold
• Pages: 251-258

[251]

Chapter 11

Proposals for Change

     changes that should now be compellingly obvious that

would go a most substantial way towards ensuring the reliability and validity of

expert opi nion evidence oered in cou rt.

USING SCIENCE AS A PR ACTICAL LITMUS TEST

FOR “EXP ERTS”

   discriminating factor bet ween good and bad expert opin-

ion lies in met hodology and not i n content, knowledge of that methodology, as

opposed to knowledge of any particular content, becomes the obvious litmus

test to initially separate the good from the bad. Scientic l iteracy can, in fact, be

used as the basic test to discriminate real experts from junk scientists. Knowl-

edge of the methods of science can and should be used to determine in eect

who is worth listening to in a courtroom.

e issues for all proposed experts could become:

Are they scientically l iterate?

Do they know and appreciate the scientic method?

Are they aware of illogical reasoning?

It is true that passing this test does not guarantee an absence of junk science:

prominent and knowledgeable scientists can bel ieve in astrology and worse. But