Expert Uncertainty: Arguments Bolstering the Ethos of Expertise in Situations of Uncertainty

10Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Arguably, one of the defining traits of an expert is certainty of knowledge. So, what happens when experts in a critical situation in public simultaneously must recognize uncertainty about knowledge and the situation and argue for specific policies and actions? This has been the challenge for many national health experts during the COVID-19 crisis. We examine such argumentative strategies by asking: what are the argumentative strategies used when attempting to secure and bolster the ethos of expertise when an expert must also acknowledge uncertainty and insufficient knowledge? The chapter examines such argumentative strategies by health authorities participating in debate and interview programs. Contrary to previous research our findings indicate that the health experts do acknowledge uncertainty, often explicitly, and also do it as a way of bolstering their ethos. Firstly, our analyses point to two ways of introducing and expressing uncertainty and lack of knowledge. Secondly, our analyses point to six ways of delimiting and qualifying the expressed uncertainty in a way that rebolsters the expert’s authority and ethos of expertise.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kjeldsen, J. E., Mølster, R., & Ihlen, Ø. (2022). Expert Uncertainty: Arguments Bolstering the Ethos of Expertise in Situations of Uncertainty. In Argumentation Library (Vol. 43, pp. 85–103). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91017-4_5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free