Abstract
In this paper, I focus on one argumentative strategy with which experts (or putative experts) in a particular field provide evidence of their expertise to a lay audience. The strategy consists in using technical vocabulary that the speaker knows the audience does not comprehend with the intention of getting the audience to infer that the speaker possesses expert knowledge in the target domain. This strategy has received little attention in argumentation theory and epistemology. For this reason, the aim of the present paper is not to reach any definitive conclusions, but mainly exploratory. After introducing the phenomenon, I discuss various examples. Next, I analyse the phenomenon from an argumentative perspective. I discuss the pragmatic mechanism that underlies it, the quality of the evidence offered, and its capacity to persuade.
Highlights
The distribution of expert knowledge in modern societies is essential to the advancement of science and technology and, to social progress
As it has often been pointed out, this distribution of expertise leads to a complex epistemic problem for everyone, given that expert knowledge is relevant to virtually all the practical decisions that we need to make on a daily basis, ranging from the decision to buy a particular type of food to the decision to get a particular vaccine or not
In his discussion of the problems that expert knowledge raises, Alvin Goldman (2001, p. 85) introduces “the novice/expert problem” to refer to the epistemic question that a layperson faces when evaluating the testimony of experts, especially in those cases where different putative experts disagree on a particular topic
Summary
The distribution of expert knowledge in modern societies is essential to the advancement of science and technology and, to social progress. Experts do not usually build explicit arguments in support of their claims on the basis of their own level of expertise, they might invite audiences to infer that their assertions are correct on this basis For that purpose, they might convey, in direct or more indirect ways, that they are experts in a particular topic. In addressing a lay audience, a speaker might intentionally use technical jargon that they know is incomprehensible to the audience This strategy is the focus of this paper. The kind of strategy I focus on in this paper is different from all the Languages 2022, 7, 41 above: the speaker intentionally uses technical jargon that they know is incomprehensible to the audience in order to convey evidence of their own expertise in the target domain. In some of the examples that I discuss below, the speaker only fakes competence with the technical jargon or genuinely but falsely believes they have it
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
