Content area
Full text
ABSTRACT: In this paper, I try to find ways to improve forensic science by identifying potential vulnerabilities. To this end, I use Francis Bacon's doctrine of idols, which distinguishes between different types of human biases that may prevent scientific and objective inquiry. Bacon's doctrine contains four sources for such biases: idola tribus (idols of the tribe), idola specus (idols of the den or cave), idola fori (idols of the market), and idola theatri (idols of the theatre). While his 400-year-old doctrine does not, of course, perfectly match up with our current world view, it still provides a productive framework for examining and cataloguing some of the potential weaknesses and limitations in our current approach to forensic science.
CITATION: Itiel E. Dror, How Can Francis Bacon Help Forensic Science? The Four Idols of Human Biases, 50 Jurimetrics J. 93-110 (2009).
Whether forensic science is actually a "science" has been extensively debated in the academic, professional, and general public media. Often the discussion is governed by well-entrenched adversaries who are concerned and motivated by interest about the outcome and implications of the debate. The difficulties are compounded by metatheoretical issues about what constitutes a science and the fact that not all sciences are equal and meet well defined and strict criteria. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that forensic science is not a unitary field; it encompasses a whole spectrum of disciplines, some of which are more scientifically based than others. Clearly DNA analysis is more scientific than bite-mark and ear-print analysis.
With such inherent difficulties and motivational biases (to name just a few), I avoid entering the debate that lacks for the most part any meaningful impact. I, however, have often wondered if and how a constructive discussion can help identify those elements in forensics that are scientific (if any) and those elements that are less, or not altogether, scientific (if any). These could be very important to forensic science, as they guide the way and erect clear signposts of how to improve and become more scientific. In this paper, I try to contribute to forensic science by constructively discussing forensic science as a science. I do this by scrutinizing potential vulnerabilities and problems that exist within forensic science, in the hopes that by...