This paper investigates the value of trust and the proper attitude lay people ought to have towards scientific experts. Trust in expertise is usually considered to be valuable, while distrust is often analyzed in cases where it is harmful. I will draw on accounts from political philosophy and argue that it is not only public trust that is valuable when it comes to scientific expertise – but also public vigilance. Expertise may be distorted in different ways, which cannot be remedied by internal control mechanisms alone. This reveals the importance of some forms of democratic oversight. The proper attitude is vigilant trust in expertise. However, vigilant trust seems to be a contradictory notion: How can one be trusting and watchful at the same time? I will show that it is not, and that trust and vigilance can be compatible to a certain extent. I will do so by distinguishing between different levels of both trust and vigilance. Interestingly, this argument requires acknowledging the value of some forms of distrust in scientific expertise, even if that distrust targets trustworthy experts.

本文探讨了信任的价值以及外行人对科学专家应该有的正确态度。对专业知识的信任通常被认为是有价值的，而在不信任有害的情况下通常会被分析。我将引用政治哲学的解释，并论证在科学专业知识方面，不仅公众信任很有价值，而且公众的警惕性也很有价值。专业知识可能以不同的方式被扭曲，这不能仅通过内部控制机制来补救。这揭示了某些形式的民主监督的重要性。正确的态度是对专业知识的警惕信任。然而，警惕的信任似乎是一个矛盾的概念：一个人如何能同时信任和警惕呢？我将证明事实并非如此，信任和警惕可以在一定程度上兼容。我将通过区分不同级别的信任和警惕来做到这一点。有趣的是，这个论点需要承认某些形式的对科学专业知识的不信任的价值，即使这种不信任针对的是值得信赖的专家。