Expert examination as an epistemological phenomenon

Authors

  • Boris I. Pruzhinin Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences, 12, Goncharnaya ul., Moscow, 109240, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2021.302

Abstract

The article examines the epistemological parameters of the phenomenon of expert examination as well as the social and cognitive features of using scientific knowledge to substantiate the objectivity of expert evaluations. Today, the scope of expert activities has significantly expanded. Accordingly, the number of studies, including philosophical ones, considering this phenomenon, in particular, has increased primarily in connection with the growth of its role in assessing the social-humanitarian risks associated with the introduction of scientific-technical advances. At the same time, attention is directed to the fact that it is precisely due to the significant expansion of the scope of expert activity that the nature of the expert examination itself is distorted — its dependence on social contexts is increasing, but its objectivity is lost. The article aims to clarify the reasons for the growth of this dependence in connection with the specificity of the epistemological parameters of knowledge, which is used as a scientific basis for expert evaluations. This aspect of expert examination, as a rule, falls out of sight of both its researchers and the experts themselves. Modern philosophers and methodologists of science state the direct dependence of expert examination on applied (i. e., limited to practical requests) developments, while, in the author’s opinion, the condition for the objectivity of expert opinions is the obligatory appeal of experts to fundamental science, motivated by the commitment to expand the sphere of holistic knowledge concerning the world. This condition is highlighted due to the epistemological perspective of comprehending expert evaluations, which makes it possible to include additional criteria for their objectivity in the sphere of the expert’s self-awareness. The actualization of such criteria, according to the author, is now becoming a prerequisite for an effective expert examination that maintains a high social status.

Keywords:

expert examination, expert evaluation, epistemology, fundamental science, applied developments, objectivity

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
 

References

Литература

Пружинин, Б. И. (1986), Рациональность и историческое единство научного знания, М.: Наука.

Климова, С. М. (2017), Гуманитарная экспертиза и экспертное сообщество: постановка проблемы, Философские науки, № 4, с. 68–80.

Тищенко, П. Д. (2008), Философские основания гуманитарной экспертизы, Знание. Понимание. Умение, № 3, с. 198–205.

Тульчинский, Г. Л. (2008), Гуманитарная экспертиза как социальная технология, Вестник Челябинской государственной академии культуры и искусств, № 4 (16), с. 38–52.

Seyedsayamdost, H. (2019), Philosophical Expertise and Philosophical Methodology. A Clearer Division and Notes on the Expertise Debate, Metaphilosophy, vol. 50, no. 1‒2, pp. 110‒129.

Костина, А. О. (2019), Нормативность, экспертиза и эпистемологический патернализм в философии науки, Эпистемология и философия науки, Т. 56, № 2, с. 229–241.

Черных, А. И. (2010), Экспертное знание и публичная экспертиза (препринт WP14/2010/05), М.: Изд. дом Гос. ун-та — Высшей школы экономики.

Короткова, О. А. (2008), К вопросу об истории развития института экспертизы, Право и политика, № 1, с. 184–187.

Нестеров, А. В. (2011), История экспертизы и экспертика, Теория и практика судебной экспертизы, № 3 (23), с. 12–19.

Шпет, Г. Г. (2005), Герменевтика и ее проблемы, в Шпет, Г. Г. Мысль и Слово. Избранные труды, М.: РОССПЭН. С. 248–469.

Шупер, В. А. (2021), Национальная идея: взгляд географа, Вопросы философии, № 8, с. 5–14.

Стёпин, В. С. (2011), Цивилизация и культура, СПб.: СПбГУП.

Пружинин, Б. И. (2009), Ratio serviens? Контуры культурно-исторической эпистемологии, М.: РОССПЭН.

Яковлев, Д. Ю. (2016), К вопросу о формировании концептуальных основ судебно-биологической экспертизы, Юридическая наука и правоохранительная практика, № 4 (38), c. 173–180.

Савинов, А. Б. (2012), Аутоценоз и демоценоз как симбиотические системы и биологические категории, Журнал общей биологии, Т. 73, № 4, c. 284–301.


References

Pruzhinin, B. I. (1986), Rationality and Historical Unity of Scientific Knowledge, Moscow: Nauka Publ. (In Russian)

Klimova, S. M. (2017), Humanitarian expertise and expert community: problem statement, Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences, no. 4, pp. 68−80. (In Russian)

Tishchenko, P. D. (2008), Philosophical Foundations of Humanitarian Expertise, Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie, no. 3, pp. 198−205. (In Russian)

Tulchinsky, G. L. (2008), Humanitarian expertise as a social technology, Herald of the Chelyabinsk State Academy of Culture and Arts, no. 4 (16), pp. 38−52. (In Russian)

Seyedsayamdost, H. (2019), Philosophical Expertise and Philosophical Methodology. A Clearer Division and Notes on the Expertise Debate, Metaphilosophy, vol. 50, no. 1‒2, pp. 110‒129.

Kostina, A. O. (2019), Normativity, Expertise and Epistemological Paternalism in Philosophy of Science, Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 229−241. (In Russian)

Chernykh, A. I. (2010), Expert knowledge and public examination (preprint WP14 / 2010/05), Moscow: Publishing house of the State University — Higher School of Economics. (In Russian)

Korotkova, O. A. (2008), On the history of the development of the institution of expertise, Pravo i politika, no. 1, pp. 184−187. (In Russian)

Nesterov, A. V. (2011), History of Expertise and Expertise, Theory and Practice of Forensic Science, no. 3 (23), pp. 12−19. (In Russian)

Shpet, G. G. (2005), Hermeneutics and Its Problems, in Shpet, G. G., Thought and Word. Selected Works, Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ. (In Russian)

Shuper, V. A. (2021), National Idea: a Geographer’s View, Voprosy filosofii, no. 8, pp. 5–14. (In Russian)

Stepin, V. S. (2011), Civilization and Culture, St. Petersburg: SPbGUP Publ. (In Russian)

Pruzhinin, B. I. (2009), Ratio Serviens? Contours of Cultural-Historical Epistemology, Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ. (In Russian)

Yakovlev, D. Iu. (2016), On the formation of the conceptual foundations of forensic biological examination, Legal Science and Law Enforcement Practice, no. 4 (38), p. 173−180. (In Russian)

Savinov, A. B. (2012), Autocenosis and democenosis as symbiotic systems and biological categories, Zhurnal obshchei biologii, vol. 73, no. 4, p. 284−301. (In Russian)

Downloads

Published

2021-10-22

How to Cite

Pruzhinin, B. I. . (2021). Expert examination as an epistemological phenomenon. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 37(3), 393–402. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2021.302

Issue

Vol. 37 No. 3 (2021): Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология

Section

Philosophy

License

Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.