Scientific Expertise: Epistemic and Social Standards—The Example of the German Radiation Protection Commission

Topoi 37 (1):55-66 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In their self-understanding, expert committees solely draw on scientific knowledge to provide policy advice. However, we try to show, first, on the basis of material related to the German Radiation Protection Commission that much of their work consists in active model building. Second, expert advice is judged by criteria that diverge from standards used for judging epistemic research. In particular, the commitment to generality or universality is replaced by the criterion of specificity, and the value of precision gives way to epistemic robustness. Third, non-epistemic considerations are included in the reasoning—albeit hesitantly. Manageability and social robustness, understood as compatibility with widespread value attitudes in society, affect the content of the recommendations.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,391

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What is an expert?Bruce D. Weinstein - 1993 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 14 (1).
Other–regarding epistemic virtues.Jason Kawall - 2002 - Ratio 15 (3):257–275.


Added to PP

58 (#206,265)

6 months
1 (#451,971)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Martin Carrier
Bielefeld University

Citations of this work

What Does Good Science-Based Advice to Politics Look Like?Martin Carrier - 2022 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 53 (1):5-21.

Add more citations