Authors
Michel Croce
University College Dublin
Abstract
Christian Quast has recently embarked on the project of systematizing the debate about the notion of expertise, an extremely fascinating and important issue addressed by scholars of many disciplines yet still in need of an interdisciplinary take. He sheds light on a number of relevant features of this notion and defends what he calls a “balanced” account of expertise, namely one that defines this concept in light of an expert’s dispositions, manifestations of their dispositions, and social role or function. In this critical reply, I offer some considerations that put pressure on Quast’s balanced account and hopefully help anyone interested in this debate take a step forward toward explaining what it takes for one to be an expert. The reply is structured as follows. First, I argue that his allegedly balanced view is liable to a potentially compromising tension between its function component and the ingredients of objective expertise (§1). Then, I show that Quast’s threefold characterization of an objective expert is too strong, as it imposes conditions that several individuals whom we would consider experts are unable to fulfill (§2). Finally, I provide reasons in favor of endorsing an objective account of expertise in light of some specific features of our society and show how this account can take into due consideration the different services experts ordinarily perform (§3).
Keywords expertise  social epistemology  functionalism  epistemic authority  Christian Quast  epistemic virtues  post-truth
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

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

On What It Takes to Be an Expert.Michel Croce - 2019 - Philosophical Quarterly 69 (274):1-21.
Experts: Which Ones Should You Trust?Alvin Goldman - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (1):85-110.
Towards a Balanced Account of Expertise.Christian Quast - 2018 - Social Epistemology 32 (6):397-418.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Balancing the Normativity of Expertise.Markus Seidel - 2019 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8 (7):34-40.
Objective Expertise and Functionalist Constraints: A Comment on Croce.Christian Quast - 2019 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8 (8):15-28.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Towards a Balanced Account of Expertise.Christian Quast - 2018 - Social Epistemology 32 (6):397-418.
What is an Expert?Bruce D. Weinstein - 1993 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 14 (1).
On What It Takes to Be an Expert.Michel Croce - 2019 - Philosophical Quarterly 69 (274):1-21.
The Possibility of Ethical Expertise.Bruce D. Weinstein - 1994 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 15 (1):1-187.
Moral Expertise: Judgment, Practice, and Analysis*: Julia Driver.Julia Driver - 2013 - Social Philosophy and Policy 30 (1-2):280-296.
Epistemological Expertise and the Problem of Epistemic Assessment.James McBain - 2007 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (1):125-133.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-05-16

Total views
93 ( #107,281 of 2,411,639 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
20 ( #37,808 of 2,411,639 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes