While experience often affords important knowledge and insight that is difficult to garner through observation or testimony alone, it also has the potential to generate conflicts of interest and unrepresentative perspectives. We call this tension the paradox of experience. In this paper, we first outline appeals to experience made in debates about access to unproven medical products and disability bioethics, as examples of how experience claims arise in bioethics and some of the challenges raised by these claims. We then motivate (...) the idea that experience can be an asset by appealing to themes in feminist and moral epistemology, distinguishing between epistemic and justice-based appeals. Next, we explain the concern that experience may be a liability by appealing to empirical work on cognitive biases and theoretical work about the problem of partial representation. We conclude with preliminary recommendations for addressing the paradox and offer several questions for future discussion. (shrink)

Bioethical consensus promotes a shared decision making model, which requires healthcare professionals to partner their knowledge with that of their patients—who, at a minimum, contribute their valu...

Digital simulacra present an entrancing vision of a research-rich future shorn of the messiness that comes from dealing with real live patients as part of the research enterprise—and in that sheari...

In their article, Cho and Martinez-Martin (2023) argue that developers and users of digital simulacra for modelling health and disease should involve a continued focus on causality of health states...

In their paper, “Conversational Artificial Intelligence in Psychotherapy: A New Therapeutic Tool or Agent?” Sedlakova and Trachsel (2023) claim that therapeutic insights and therapeutic changes are...