| |

Background
Is there a concept of evidence that applies universally? Are
there specific or generic techniques for manipulating evidence
that can be applied across disciplinary boundaries? These are questions
that arise continually in the multidisciplinary research programme “Evidence,
Inference and Enquiry: Towards an Integrated Science of Evidence” at
University College London, supported by the Leverhulme Trust and
the ESRC.
We observe apparently very different concepts, standards, interpretations
and uses of evidence in various fields of research and practice.
Is there a fundamental common core underlying all evidential reasoning,
or is "evidence" just a convenient word that loosely
covers many disparate activities in disparate spheres? This project
will investigate the possibility of reaching a universal concept
of evidence, considering plausible interdisciplinary connections
as well as impediments to universality. The work will both build
on and facilitate the progress of the many independent projects
constituting the programme, and their interactions.
The other projects in the overall research programme cover a wide
variety of disciplinary and methodological areas, including medicine,
statistics, philosophy, law, forensics, psychology, economics,
history, classics, physics and chemistry. The purpose of this pivotal
project is to facilitate intellectual liaison between those different
projects, and to develop a considered external view of their workings
and interactions, assumptions and methods.
Research Questions
Our research will be framed by various guiding questions, including
the following:
- Are there situations in which different
communities would have radically different verdicts on questions
of evidence?
- What do disputes within a given community
reveal about the concept of evidence?
- Do different representations of evidence
lead to different conclusions?
- Under what circumstances is it plausible
to quantify evidential reasoning?
- What are the contextual factors that
affect evidential reasoning?
- Who demands evidence? Who supplies
it? Who uses it?
- Who worries about the nature of evidence?
Why?
- Should we seek a unified concept of
evidence? What benefits would accrue from such a concept?
- Notwithstanding differences in interpretation
and use, is there a fundamental core of abstract properties and
behaviours of evidence that can command general agreement?
Methods
Pursuing these issues will necessitate becoming acquainted with
the spirit and basic content of each project, and communicating
the essentials to researchers on other projects. General themes
and methods will be explored with a view to applying them to several
different projects at once. We shall seek to develop innovative
channels of communication between different projects. Promising
pairwise connections, bringing together researchers from both sides
in imaginative ways, will be sought and encouraged. Particular
attention will be paid to identifying common features – philosophical,
logical, mathematical, methodological, etc. – underlying
seemingly different understandings and uses of evidence.
Activities and Outputs
There will be small informal workshops to assist the process of
inter-project liaison, and larger more formal events addressing
broader themes. The ideas emerging from this project will help
shape conferences and other events for the overall programme. As
well as giving helpful input to the publications produced by various
individual projects, we shall produce a series of research papers
on the possibilities and challenges of establishing a general concept
of evidence. We may also consider publishing a book developing
our findings. |
|