Negacionismo epistêmico
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-4014.202539113.009Keywords:
Epistemic negationism, Law, Expert knowledge, Junk science, DaubertAbstract
The apparently trivial idea that there are circumstances in which the exercise of the law cannot disregard the opinion of experts has been the target of severe criticism for at least 150 years. What I call “epistemic negationism” is something that becomes apparent whenever this idea is criticized on the grounds that there are attributes intrinsic to science that render it innocuous when used as an aid in the resolution of legal disputes. What is denied, in this case, is not necessarily the epistemic value of science, but the possibility of it effectively being useful when one counts on it to obtain answers that, in principle, only science can offer. How can this special type of negationism come up in the public debate and, once present, what does it look like?
Downloads
References
AYALA F. J.; BLACK, B. Science and the Courts. American Scientist, v.81, n.3, p.230-9, May-June 1993.
BERRY, H. The medical expert, junk reasoning, and junk science in personal injury litigation. Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal, v.40, n.4, p.1101-43, 2005.
FELDMAN, H. L. Science and Uncertainty in Mass Exposure Litigation. Law Texas Review, v.74, n.1, p.1-48, 1995.
GIANELLI, P. C. “Junk Science”: The Criminal Cases. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, v.84, n.1, p.105-28, 1993.
GOLAN, T. Laws of men and laws of nature: the history of scientific evidence expert testimony in England and America. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 2004.
HAACK, S. Trials & Tribulations: Science in the Courts. Daedalus, v.132, n.4, p.54-63, 2003.
HAND, L. Historical and Practical Considerations regarding Expert Testimony. Harvard Law Review, v.15, n.1, p.40-58, 1901.
HILBERT, J. The Disappointing History of Science in the Courtroom: Frye, Daubert, and the Ongoing Crisis of “Junk Science” in Criminal Trials. Oklahoma Law Review, v.71, p.759-81, 2019.
HUBER, P. Junk Science and the Jury. University of Chicago Legal Forum, Issue 1, Article 10, p.273-302, 1990.
HUBER, P. Galileo”s Revenge: Junk Science in the courtroom. New York: BasicBook, 1991.
JASANOFF, S. What judges should know about the sociology of science. Jurimetrics, v.32. n.3, p.345-59, 1992.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Renan Springer de Freitas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Estudos Avançados não celebra contrato de cessão de direitos autorais com seus colaboradores, razão pela qual não detém os direitos autorais dos artigos publicados. Os interessados em reproduzir artigos publicados na revista devem necessariamente obter o consentimento do autor e atribuir devidamente os créditos ao periódico.
