Expert judgment in climate science: How it is used and how it can be justified

被引:6
|
作者
Majszak, Mason [1 ,2 ]
Jebeile, Julie [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bern, Inst Philosophy, Bern, Switzerland
[2] Univ Bern, Oeschger Ctr Climate Change Res, Bern, Switzerland
[3] CNRS, Ctr Natl Rech Meteorol, Meteo France, CNRM UMR 3589, Toulouse, France
基金
瑞士国家科学基金会;
关键词
Expert judgment; Climate uncertainty; Epistemic opacity; Scienti fic models; Tacit knowledge; Intuition; Values in science; Subjectivity; MODELS;
D O I
10.1016/j.shpsa.2023.05.005
中图分类号
N09 [自然科学史]; B [哲学、宗教];
学科分类号
01 ; 0101 ; 010108 ; 060207 ; 060305 ; 0712 ;
摘要
Like any science marked by high uncertainty, climate science is characterized by a widespread use of expert judgment. In this paper, we first show that, in climate science, expert judgment is used to overcome uncertainty, thus playing a crucial role in the domain and even at times supplanting models. One is left to wonder to what extent it is legitimate to assign expert judgment such a status as an epistemic superiority in the climate context, especially as the production of expert judgment is particularly opaque. To begin answering this question, we highlight the key components of expert judgment. We then argue that the justification for the status and use of expert judgment depends on the competence and the individual subjective features of the expert producing the judgment since expert judgment involves not only the expert's theoretical knowledge and tacit knowledge, but also their intuition and values. This goes against the objective ideal in science and the criteria from social epistemology which largely attempt to remove subjectivity from expertise.
引用
收藏
页码:32 / 38
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条