Ozonoff D. Epistemology in the Courtroom: A Little “Knowledge” is a Dangerous Thing: A Commentary on the Papers of Haack, and Rothman and Greenland. Am J Public Health, Supplement (July 2005).

Abstract:

Core epistemological questions—questions about what we know, how we know it, and when we are justified in saying we know it—have a long and deep history. The US Supreme Court broached the subject in the 1993 decision Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc, with references to Hempel, Popper, and other scholars. We comment here on the articles of Rothman and Greenland, who are scientists, and Haack, who is a philosopher. Their views suggest that questions of causation are neither as simple nor as difficult as many scientists and philosophers have made them.

Read more: Coronado Conference I papers.