David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Quarterly 61 (244):496-517 (2011)
Using the controversy over the MMR vaccine, I consider the reasons why non-experts should defer to experts, and I sketch a model for understanding cases where they fail to defer. I first suggest that an intuitively plausible model of the expert/non-expert relationship is complicated by shifting epistemic standards. One possible moderate response to this challenge, based on a more complex notion of non-experts' relationship with experts, seems unappealing as an account of the MMR controversy. A more radical suggestion is that non-experts might have a political reason to defer to experts, when not doing so will involve ‘epistemological free-riding’. I investigate the implications.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Paul C. Snelling (2012). Challenging the Moral Status of Blood Donation. Health Care Analysis (4):1-26.
Stephen John (2015). Inductive Risk and the Contexts of Communication. Synthese 192 (1):79-96.
Leticia Morales (2015). Taking Facts Seriously: Judicial Intervention in Public Health Controversies. Public Health Ethics 8 (2):185-195.
Similar books and articles
Robert Pierson (1994). The Epistemic Authority of Expertise. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:398 - 405.
Jeryl L. Mumpower & Thomas R. Stewart (1996). Expert Judgement and Expert Disagreement. Thinking and Reasoning 2 (2 & 3):191 – 212.
Bruce D. Sales & Leonore Simon (1993). Institutional Constraints on the Ethics of Expert Testimony. Ethics and Behavior 3 (3 & 4):231 – 249.
Michael Cholbi (2007). Moral Expertise and the Credentials Problem. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (4):323-334.
Jennifer Mnookin, Idealizing Science and Demonizing Experts: An Intellectual History of Expert Evidence.
Christopher W. Tindale (2011). Character and Knowledge: Learning From the Speech of Experts. [REVIEW] Argumentation 25 (3):341-353.
Axel Gelfert (2011). Expertise, Argumentation, and the End of Inquiry. Argumentation 25 (3):297-312.
Richard Scheines, Expert Statistical Testimony and Epidemiological Evidence: The Toxic Effects of Lead Exposure on Children.
Jason Borenstein (2002). Authenticating Expertise. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 16 (1):85-102.
Geert Munnichs (2004). Whom to Trust? Public Concerns, Late Modern Risks, and Expert Trustworthiness. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (2):113-130.
Hugo Mercier (2011). When Experts Argue: Explaining the Best and the Worst of Reasoning. [REVIEW] Argumentation 25 (3):313-327.
Simon J. Evnine (2003). Epistemic Unities. Erkenntnis 59 (3):365 - 388.
Added to index2010-12-01
Total downloads90 ( #36,775 of 1,725,989 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #289,836 of 1,725,989 )
How can I increase my downloads?