Irreconcilable differences? The troubled marriage of science and law

Susan Haack

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

29 Scopus citations


In many respects [the scientific expert] seems to be a positive annoyance to lawyers, and even to judges at times, a sort of intractable, incompatible, inharmonious factor, disturbing the otherwise smooth current of legal procedure; too important or necessary to be ruled out, too intelligent and disciplined mentally to yield without reason to ordinary rules and regulations of the court,... and, at the same time[,] possessing an undoubted influence with the jury, that it is difficult to restrict by the established rules and maxims of legal procedure. It is often said, with good cause, that . . . the goal of a trial and the goal of science are . . . at odds. . . . [A]s a general rule, . . . courts don't do science very well.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-23
Number of pages23
JournalLaw and Contemporary Problems
Issue number1
StatePublished - 2009

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law


Dive into the research topics of 'Irreconcilable differences? The troubled marriage of science and law'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this