Experts: Which ones should you trust?


Authors
Alvin Goldman
Rutgers University - New Brunswick
Abstract
Mainstream epistemology is a highly theoretical and abstract enterprise. Traditional epistemologists rarely present their deliberations as critical to the practical problems of life, unless one supposes—as Hume, for example, did not—that skeptical worries should trouble us in our everyday affairs. But some issues in epistemology are both theoretically interesting and practically quite pressing. That holds of the problem to be discussed here: how laypersons should evaluate the testimony of experts and decide which of two or more rival experts is most credible. It is of practical importance because in a complex, highly specialized world people are constantly confronted with situations in which, as comparative novices, they must turn to putative experts for intellectual guidance or assistance. It is of theoretical interest because the appropriate epistemic considerations are far from transparent; and it is not clear how far the problems lead to insurmountable skeptical quandaries. This paper does not argue for flat-out skepticism in this domain; nor, on the other hand, does it purport to resolve all pressures in the direction of skepticism. It is an exploratory paper, which tries to identify problems and examine some possible solutions, not to establish those solutions definitively.
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  Contemporary Philosophy  Philosophy of Mind
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0031-8205
DOI 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2001.tb00093.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 49,096
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Knowledge in a Social World.Alvin I. Goldman - 1999 - Oxford University Press.
Testimony: A Philosophical Study.C. A. J. Coady - 1992 - Oxford University Press.
Content Preservation.Tyler Burge - 1993 - Philosophical Review 102 (4):457.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Peer Disagreement and Higher Order Evidence.Thomas Kelly - 2010 - In Alvin I. Goldman & Dennis Whitcomb (eds.), Social Epistemology: Essential Readings. Oxford University Press. pp. 183--217.
Moral Disagreement and Higher-Order Evidence.Klemens Kappel & Frederik J. Andersen - 2019 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 22 (5):1103-1120.

View all 151 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Trust in Scientific Publishing.Harry Hummels & Hans E. Roosendaal - 2001 - Journal of Business Ethics 34 (2):87 - 100.
Creating Trust.Robert C. Solomon - 1998 - Business Ethics Quarterly 8 (2):205-232.
Trust: Self-Interest and the Common Good.Marek Kohn - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
Trust in Strangers, Trust in Friends.Jessica Miller - 2003 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 10 (1):17-22.
Puzzles About Trust.Doran Smolkin - 2008 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 46 (3):431-449.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
645 ( #6,863 of 2,311,494 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
51 ( #13,953 of 2,311,494 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature