在多伯特诉梅里尔·道药物股份有限公司案(Daubert v.Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals,Inc.)~(〔1〕)和锦湖轮胎公司诉卡迈克尔案(Kumho Tier Co.V.Carmichael.)~(〔2〕)中,美国联邦最高法院确立了关于专家证言的规则,要求专家证言需具备“可靠性”(reliability)。这些裁决非常清晰地表明,审判法官要履行“守门人”职责,过滤掉那些基于不可靠的专门知识的证言,不管该专门知识属于科学领域的专门知识还是非科学领域的专门知识。这一新的要求引起了学界的广泛关注和激烈的理论争议。然 In the case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ~ ([1]) and Kumho Tier Co. V. Carmichael. In [2], the Supreme Court of the United States established the rules on expert testimony, requiring expert testimony to have “reliability.” These rulings make it very clear that Trial Judges are required to perform “gatekeepers” duties by filtering out testimony based on unreliable expertise, whether that expertise is in the scientific or non-scientific fields. This new request aroused widespread concern and heated theoretical controversy in the academic circle. Of course