Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-011-9218-7
DC FieldValue
dc.titleExpertise, Argumentation, and the End of Inquiry
dc.contributor.authorGelfert, A.
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-09T03:17:26Z
dc.date.available2014-04-09T03:17:26Z
dc.date.issued2011-08
dc.identifier.citationGelfert, A. (2011-08). Expertise, Argumentation, and the End of Inquiry. Argumentation 25 (3) : 297-312. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-011-9218-7
dc.identifier.issn0920427X
dc.identifier.urihttp://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/50033
dc.description.abstractThis paper argues that the problem of expertise calls for a rapprochement between social epistemology and argumentation theory. Social epistemology has tended to emphasise the role of expert testimony, neglecting the argumentative function of appeals to expert opinion by non-experts. The first half of the paper discusses parallels and contrasts between the two cases of direct expert testimony and appeals to expert opinion by our epistemic peers, respectively. Importantly, appeals to expert opinion need to be advertised as such, if they are to sway an epistemic peer. The second half of the paper sketches a theoretical framework for thinking about assessments of expertise in a unified way, via a 'default and challenge' model that emphasises the need for a version of conversational scorekeeping. It is through such scorekeeping that interlocutors can track and coordinate their differences in epistemic outlook. The paper concludes with a genealogical perspective on the function of (attributions of) expertise: acceptance of another's appeal to expert opinion may be construed as tacit agreement that inquiry, for now, has been taken far enough. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
dc.description.urihttp://libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10503-011-9218-7
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectDefault-and-challenge model
dc.subjectExpert opinion
dc.subjectExpertise
dc.subjectSocial epistemology
dc.subjectTestimony
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentPHILOSOPHY
dc.description.doi10.1007/s10503-011-9218-7
dc.description.sourcetitleArgumentation
dc.description.volume25
dc.description.issue3
dc.description.page297-312
dc.identifier.isiut000293974900003
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

20
checked on Nov 30, 2022

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

18
checked on Nov 30, 2022

Page view(s)

251
checked on Nov 24, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.