Publics and Expertise

• In Event: Democracy and Expertise

Abstract

PUBLICS AND EXPERTISE

From its exalted position at the beginning of the 20st century as a mark of social authority removed from politics to becoming a dubious claim marked by political contestation at the beginning of the 21st, ‘expertise’ is now a major focus of political and democratic debate. Yet we know that specialists have knowledge that generalists don’t and deserve a certain amount of deference if generalists are to deal intelligently with the world. A legitimate check on authoritarian expertise may come from democratic ethics, but how? This paper explores the extent to which ‘publics’ in the conduct of science and politics may filter the performance of expertise and democracy with results that usefully validate (to the best of our ability) social knowledge. Building on the early 20th century political thought of John Dewey and Walter Lippmann, the notable late 20th century edited collection by Thomas L. Haskell on the authority of experts, and the early 21st century analysis by the sociologist Gil Eyal about the crisis of expertise, this paper addresses the enduring issue (since Athenian democracy) of how to assess and address special kinds of practical and epistemic authority on behalf of a democratic society as well as how to limit democratic power on behalf of expertise.

Author

• John R. Wallach