The Arts of Persuasion in Science and Law: Conflicting Norms in the Courtroom
25 Pages Posted: 25 Oct 2007 Last revised: 27 May 2014
Much of the commentary about the Supreme Court's Daubert Trilogy focuses on the disconnect between contemporary understandings of science and the Court's apparent acceptance of a Popperian epistemology. This paper takes a somewhat different tact, considering differences in how persuasion is conducted in the courtroom and within the scientific community. These differences are analyzed along four dimensions: data sources, use of evidence, mindset, and goal of inquiry.
Keywords: expert testimony, Daubert
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation