Commentary
The Academic as Expert Witness
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11261536 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael Ruse (0000-0001-5740-0169, Departments of History and Philosophy, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1986 |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 68-73 |
| Publication date | 1986-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Science Technology & Human Values (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0162-2439 • E-ISSN: 1552-8251 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/016224398601100211 |
| OpenAlex | W289684643 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 9 |
| References cited | 2 |
Among the expert witnesses called by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in 1981, in its successful attack on the Arkansas Creationism law, was a historian and philosopher of science, namely, me. As I have explained elsewhere, my task was to bridge the gap between the theological witnesses and the scientists.' In particular, I had to show, first, that the history of evolutionary theory is not a simplistic story of dogmatic atheistic science crushing sensitive religion and, second, that judged by proper criteria, whereas modern evolutionary theory qualifies as science, Creationism does not. It was the second, philosophical part of my testimony that was the more crucial, and as it happens, the judge in the case, William R. Overton, made it part of his reasoning in denying the constitutionality of the Arkansas law. Listing some five criteria (provided by me) for the scientific status, Overton concluded that the law violated the First Amendment separation of Church and State.2 Shortly after Overton's judgment appeared, an emminent philosopher of science, Larry Laudan, harshly criticized my contribution, arguing that the criteria of demarcation I provided failed to separate science from non-science, and that Creationism (what its present-day supporters like to call Creation-science) should be excluded from the classroom because it is bad science, rather than because it is religion (of whatever kind or value).3 Now, another equally eminent philoso
Archaeology · Engineering ethics · Expert witness · Political science · Witness · Engineering · History · Law · Mormonism, Religion, and History · Psychology
A Cautionary Tale About Cautionary Tales About Intervention
Science as a Vacation
How Social Scientists Make Causal Claims in Court
AI and Redistricting
The Sociologist as Expert Witness
Science and Technology Studies on Trial
From Ruse to Farce
Making use of creationism. A case-study for the philosophy of science classroom
The Political Scientist as Expert Witness
| Unique citing works | 9 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,25 |
| Citation span | 1990 - 2022 (33) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |