Writing about Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.1 _ which
set new standards for the admissibility of scientific evidence in the federal
courts - is a bit like writing about Salem witchcraft, as explained by colonial
historian Mary Beth Norton:
Random Early Americanist: "What are you working on now?"
Me (with some hesitation): "Salem witchcraft."
Early Americanist... : "But... surely there's nothing new to say."2
Professor Norton, however, had become "progressively dissatisfied with [the]
limited framework" in the leading study of the social mileau of 1692 Salem
because of its insistence that gender is irrelevant to the story.3
No comments:
Post a Comment