论表象时代的终结

在科学证言的采信上，法院从有效性的表象或者替代者角度制定了标准，在19世纪和20世纪早期，法院依赖于市场的外行人对专家的行当的普遍接受这一表象。依赖于表象既会使法院犯下假阴性的错误，也会使法院犯下假阳性的错误。在Daubert案中，法院抛弃老旧的Frye普遍接受表象．要求法官要进行认识论探究，以确定所提出的证言是否值得...

The End of the Era of Proxies

With regard to scientific testimony, the court have formulated the test in terms of proxies or surrogates for validity. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the courts relied on the proxy of general acceptance of the expert＇s discipline by laypersons in the marketplace. Reliance on proxies can lead the courts astray into committing both false negative and false positive errors. In the Daubert case, the court abandoned the old Frye general acceptance proxy and mandated that judges conduct an essentially epistemological inquiry to determine whether the proffered testimony deserves to be called ＂scientific . . . knowledge＂ under Rule 702. The abandonment of proxy standards posed some challenges for the American courts including ensuring the opposition a fair opportunity to review and critique the expert＇s reasoning and enhancing the participants＇ ability to understand scientific reasoning. However, we should be optimistic facing the challenges. By abandoning proxies, the United States Supreme Court has forced the issue of whether the participants in the American legal system are competent to properly assess empirical data and reasoning. The answer to that question may help shape the future role of courts in the pursuit of truth, justice, and the public interest.