Proposals for Change

AuthorAlan D. Gold
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.
   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

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT