In my view, the legal system's inability to properly manage scientific disputes stems in part from the problem of competition within the legal field--and the presence of scientists who, in this adversarial environment, trade the values of science for those of law.
Lawyers, who dwell--and properly so--in an adversarial realm, are governed by written rules of professional conduct that require them to show loyalty to their clients, protect their clients' interests, and act as zealous advocates on their clients' behalf. These rules are suited to their profession. Scientists, on the other hand, have no written rules of professional conduct. But the scientific community appears to have developed strong unwritten professional rules--based on norms of intellectual objectivity--that are different from those governing lawyers. The differing rules properly reflect the differing goals of each discipline.
The goal of law is to resolve disputes among citizens peacefully, whereas science's overriding goal is to ...
