Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Keywords
  • Date

Search results

Number of results: 3
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In recent years, interest in the problem of expert knowledge has intensified among social scientists. One of the topics more frequently addressed in this context is the relationship between experts and laypeople. This paper examines this issue from the perspective of the concept of epistemic dependence formulated by John Hardwig. I argue that this concept poses a severe challenge to the vision of scientific inquiry dominant in the scientific literature and to the democratic idea of politics. I examine three strategies encountered in the literature for responding to this challenge: individualist, institutional, and epistocratic. Alvin Goldman advocates the first one, as he presents strategies at the disposal of a layman facing two conflicting expert opinions. The second is the belief in the scientific community’s potential to resolve all controversies and protect non-specialists from confronting them. The third is to eliminate epistemic dependence by including only those with sufficient practical experience in expert discussions. In the end, I conclude that the problem of epistemic dependence has no suitable solution. We should place our hopes only with strategies for circumventing it rather than confronting it.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Janusz Grygieńć
1

  1. Instytut Filozofii, Wydział Filozofii i Nauk Społecznych, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu, ul. Fosa Staromiejska 1a, Toruń
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article presents conceptions and theories of expert knowledge, as well as discussions on the epistemological status of expert knowledge, cognitive competences falling within the scope of expertise and expert authority. They are treated as a kind of extra-institutional knowledge, referring only to a small extent to the scientific knowledge and academic circles. The positions of Alvin Goldman, Harry Collins and R. Evans, Z. Majdik and W. Keith, T. Burge and J. Shanteau on the validity of expert knowledge and methods of its justification are presented. The paper points to the problematic nature and certain limitations of the traditional perspective on the credibility of expert knowledge and expert authority. On the example of the phenomenon of the autism spectrum and traditional judgments about it—in particular, expert opinions issued about people covered by it, as well as common opinions and stereotypes— the discussion on the changes taking place in this field of knowledge and social practice is presented. Conceptions of expertise by experience in the subject of autism are discussed, including the so-called self-advocacy and self-advocacy scientists. These new cognitive attitudes and social functions of autism spectrum experts are also analyzed from the point of view of the epistemological credibility of this type of knowledge and competence.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Maciej Wodziński
1
Marek Hetmański
2

  1. Szkoła Doktorska Nauk Humanistycznych UMCS, Pl. M.Curie-Skłodowskiej 4, 20-031 Lublin
  2. Instytut Filozofii UMCS, Pl. M. Curie-Skłodowskiej 4, 20-031 Lublin
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In this article, I reflect on recent discussions of the methodological status of scientific knowledge within and outside the Academy. I draw attention to the problem of declining public trust in science (risk and fear society) and the phenomenon of post-truth. In the context of these issues, I present three positions whose authors define the relationship between official academic science in relation to other forms of knowledge (lay people) and forms of knowledge use outside the Academy (politics). The first position termed “elective modernism” was formulated by Harry Collins and Robert Evans in the context of discussions of the third wave of science disputes. Elective modernism defines the way in which policy decisions are made on the recommendations of scholars who have a methodological self-awareness of the possibilities and limitations of scientific knowledge. The second position is Steve Fuller's proposal of protestant science as a form of science in the context of posttruth conditions. In this view, knowledge can be produced by anyone, but it must meet certain specified scientific criteria. The third position is the view of expert knowledge proposed by Mark R. Brown, as a representation of various worldview or cultural options, whose representatives commission experts to make appropriate recommendations for certain political decisions.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Rafał Paweł Wierzchosławski
1

  1. Liberal Arts and Sciences, Collegium Historicum UAM, Poznań

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more