Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T20:13:24.051Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Trial and Error

Two Confusions in Daubert

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2014

Susan Haack
Affiliation:
University of Miami
Get access

Summary

[U]nder the [Federal Rules of Evidence] the trial judge must ensure that any and all scientific testimony or evidence admitted is not only relevant, but reliable…. The subject of an expert’s testimony must be “scientific … knowledge.” The adjective “scientific” implies a grounding in the methods or procedures of science…. [I]n order to qualify as “scientific knowledge,” an inference or assertion must be derived by the scientific method…. “Scientific methodology today is based on generating hypotheses and testing them to see if they can be falsified; indeed, this methodology is what distinguishes science from other fields of inquiry.”

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993)

After Mrs. Daubert had taken Bendectin for morning-sickness in pregnancy, her son Jason was born with severe birth defects. Believing that Bendectin was the cause, in 1989 the Dauberts brought suit against the manufacturers of the drug, Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. At trial, however, the court excluded the expert witnesses the Dauberts had proffered to testify on the question of causation, on the grounds that the consensus in the relevant scientific community was that Bendectin does not cause birth defects. With the plaintiffs’ causation experts excluded, there was no case to answer, and the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Merrell Dow; the appeals court affirmed.

Type
Chapter
Information
Evidence Matters
Science, Proof, and Truth in the Law
, pp. 104 - 121
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hempel, Carl G., “Studies in the Logic of Confirmation” (1945); reprinted in Hempel, , Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science (New York: Free Press, 1965), 3–46Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G., “The Irrelevance of the Concept of Truth for the Critical Appraisal of Scientific Theories” (1990), in Jeffrey, Richard, ed., Selected Philosophical Essays [by] Carl G. Hempel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Trial and Error
  • Susan Haack, University of Miami
  • Book: Evidence Matters
  • Online publication: 05 August 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139626866.006
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Trial and Error
  • Susan Haack, University of Miami
  • Book: Evidence Matters
  • Online publication: 05 August 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139626866.006
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Trial and Error
  • Susan Haack, University of Miami
  • Book: Evidence Matters
  • Online publication: 05 August 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139626866.006
Available formats
×