The architecture of forensic knowledge: Ontology, transformation, and capture

IF 3.2 Q1 Social Sciences
Max M. Houck Ph.D., FRSC
{"title":"The architecture of forensic knowledge: Ontology, transformation, and capture","authors":"Max M. Houck Ph.D., FRSC","doi":"10.1016/j.fsisyn.2026.100662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Forensic science has long struggled with \"technical instrumentalism,\" a crisis where practical efficacy outpaces its intellectual foundation for producing reliable knowledge. This manuscript traces a history from this initial diagnosis toward a formal theory of warranted information. It first explores the ontological response provided by Haq et al., which redefines evidence not as isolated objects but as manifestations of structured change resulting from energy transfer, anchoring forensic inference in the robust reconstruction of events. This ontology is bridged with the concept of f-transforms (natural, cultural, and forensic), which track the sequential reconfiguration of items, asserting that forensic knowledge is transformed, not merely discovered.</div><div>The inquiry then examines the territory of forensic epistemology, arguing that the discipline's status as a captive profession leads to epistemic dependence and epistemic capture. This structural placement subordinates scientific rigor to institutional and legal priorities, often resulting in corporate mental models that normalize specific interpretations. The paper distinguishes between inevitable scientific uncertainty (rooted in entropy and the material limits of proxy data) and detrimental institutional uncertainty (stemming from governance and the management of the transformation chain). Ultimately, the forensic warrant, the justified authority of a conclusion, is argued to be earned only through transparent management of this entire transformational chain. This requires adopting fiduciary-epistemic duties, including balanced disclosure and active preservation of contestability, to ensure that forensic authority rests on demonstrated logical justification rather than institutional power.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36925,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science International: Synergy","volume":"12 ","pages":"Article 100662"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science International: Synergy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X26000057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Forensic science has long struggled with "technical instrumentalism," a crisis where practical efficacy outpaces its intellectual foundation for producing reliable knowledge. This manuscript traces a history from this initial diagnosis toward a formal theory of warranted information. It first explores the ontological response provided by Haq et al., which redefines evidence not as isolated objects but as manifestations of structured change resulting from energy transfer, anchoring forensic inference in the robust reconstruction of events. This ontology is bridged with the concept of f-transforms (natural, cultural, and forensic), which track the sequential reconfiguration of items, asserting that forensic knowledge is transformed, not merely discovered.
The inquiry then examines the territory of forensic epistemology, arguing that the discipline's status as a captive profession leads to epistemic dependence and epistemic capture. This structural placement subordinates scientific rigor to institutional and legal priorities, often resulting in corporate mental models that normalize specific interpretations. The paper distinguishes between inevitable scientific uncertainty (rooted in entropy and the material limits of proxy data) and detrimental institutional uncertainty (stemming from governance and the management of the transformation chain). Ultimately, the forensic warrant, the justified authority of a conclusion, is argued to be earned only through transparent management of this entire transformational chain. This requires adopting fiduciary-epistemic duties, including balanced disclosure and active preservation of contestability, to ensure that forensic authority rests on demonstrated logical justification rather than institutional power.
法医学知识的体系结构:本体、转换和捕获。
长期以来,法医学一直在与“技术工具主义”作斗争,这是一种实际效力超过其产生可靠知识的知识基础的危机。这份手稿追溯了历史,从这个最初的诊断到正式的理论保证的信息。它首先探讨了Haq等人提供的本体论反应,该反应将证据重新定义为不是孤立的物体,而是由能量转移引起的结构化变化的表现,将法医推理锚定在事件的稳健重建中。该本体与f转换(自然、文化和法医)的概念相连接,f转换跟踪项目的顺序重新配置,断言法医知识是转换的,而不仅仅是发现的。然后,调查考察了司法认识论的领域,认为该学科作为一个被俘虏的职业的地位导致了知识依赖和知识捕获。这种结构安排使科学的严谨性服从于制度和法律的优先级,经常导致将特定解释规范化的公司心理模型。本文区分了不可避免的科学不确定性(植根于熵和代理数据的物质限制)和有害的制度不确定性(源于治理和转换链的管理)。最终,法庭授权,结论的正当权威,被认为只有通过对整个转换链的透明管理才能获得。这就需要采取信义认识义务,包括平衡披露和积极维护可争议性,以确保司法权威依赖于证明的逻辑理由,而不是制度权力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
75
审稿时长
90 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书