Ratio Juris 29 (1):59-82 (2016)

Douglas Walton
University of Windsor
Tribunals have come to depend increasingly on expertise for determining the facts in cases. However, current legal methods have proved problematic to work with. This paper argues that, as a special model of public understanding of science, assessing expertise should consider source credibility of expertise from internal aspects, including scientific validity and reliability, and external aspects involving the credibility of experts. Using the Carneades Argumentation System we show that the internal and the external aspects are mediated by the structure of the argument from expert opinion with its matching set of critical questions
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/raju.12115
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,374
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Collected Papers.Charles S. Peirce - 1931 - Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

View all 25 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Epistemology of Scientific Evidence.Douglas Walton & Nanning Zhang - 2013 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 21 (2):173-219.
On a Razor's Edge: Evaluating Arguments From Expert Opinion.Douglas Walton - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):139-159.
Appeal to Expert Opinion: Arguments From Authority.Douglas Walton - 1997 - Pennsylvania State University Press.
Mizrahi and Seidel: Experts in Confusion.Martin David Hinton - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (4):539-554.


Added to PP index

Total views
11 ( #803,089 of 2,420,338 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #542,912 of 2,420,338 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes