An exposed expert improvises untestable mechanisms rather than concede error
Evidence
Guswa labored at the chalkboard that morning. True to Schlichtmann’s prediction, Guswa had groundwater flowing deep into the bedrock, a hundred feet down, three hundred feet, a thousand feet, in all directions along cracks and fissures that existed only in hypothesis. He culled dozens of numbers, changing gradients and permeability, multiplying and dividing numbers in an effort to salvage his theory. He stood at the board in front of the jury box and muttered numbers to himself, punching them into his calculator. “Now, how am I going to do this here?” he said under his breath at one point. — , Harr Jonathan - A Civil Action, 2198
Categorization
- FICTION: Rich visual: a man publicly muttering arithmetic to himself, inventing thousand-foot fissures ‘that existed only in hypothesis,’ as the jury watches him drown.
- XREF: connects to: A teacher can model graceful failure and cancellation without punitive affect; Signaling effortlessness requires deliberate, costly errors to seem authentic — W. David Marx, Status and Culture: How Our Desire for…, 271; Diagnostic tests whose results require expert interpretation are vulnerable to being dismissed as divination — , Harr Jonathan - A Civil Action , 1445 (+16 more)
Broader Connections
- An agent should plan around its own future errors, not ideal execution
#expands(0.95) — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1031 - Lay trust in expert systems founders when experts’ own ignorance surfaces
#exemplifies(0.95) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 316 - Challenging expert claims requires refusing the expert’s framing language entirely
#complicates(0.90) — The Friends of Attention, Attensity!, 148 - A judge’s self-interest in avoiding admitted error shapes legal rulings
#exemplifies(0.90) — Jonathan Harr, A Civil Action, 2732 - Questioning expert witnesses’ expertise or incentives is fair game in cross-examination
#expands(0.85) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1052 - Epistemic assurance rests on doubt, not certainty
#expands(0.85) — Russell Muirhead and Nancy L. Rosenblum, A Lot of People Are Saying, 272 - Incorrect for practical endeavors is revealed through catastrophic failure rather than mere anomalies
#expands(0.85) - Materialist errors are correctable by evidence, not reducible to discursive position
#complicates(0.80) - Winning arguments yields tautologies whereas losing them properly can expose untruth
#complicates(0.80) — Theodor W. Adorno, Minima Moralia, 83 - Deductive reasoning cannot explain novel cases, competing rules, or legal change
#complicates(0.75) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1256 - Inoculation can target faulty reasoning tactics rather than specific facts
#complicates(0.75) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 962 - Denying the antecedent is an invalid logical inference in formal reasoning
#complicates(0.75) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 938 - Expert witnesses can undermine their credibility through selective memory during trials.
#complicates(0.75) — Lynley Hood, A City Possessed, 1679 - Falsifiable claims coexisted with advisers rejecting evidential standards outright
#complicates(0.75) — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 25 - An informal fallacy fails because its premises are untrue or rules are violated
#complicates(0.70) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 774