Witness hearings cannot establish the truth of policy predictions

Evidence

Whether reliable evidence exists to justify claims concerning means-end hypotheses, or the probable consequences of policy decisions, cannot ordinarily be ascertained by the heat of affirmation and denial of witnesses at a hearing, but by a cool, dispassionate examination of our accumulated knowledge. If because of human limitations such knowledge is unavailable, a hearing surely would not produce it. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 676

Categorization

• XREF: Ties into earlier chapter content on hearings as interest-alignment signaling rather than evidence evaluation. — connects to: Uncommitted hearings function as interest-alignment signaling rather than evidence evaluation — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 648; Public hearings are preference tallies, not meaningful deliberation; Hearing transcripts rarely influence committee bill decisions — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 665 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Pure inductive knowledge cannot justify claims about the future. #corroborates (0.85)
• Decisions are made under irreducible uncertainty that evidence alone cannot resolve #expands (0.82) — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 490