This final chapter provides the culmination of the book’s argument by directly addressing the problem of hyper-specialization, which undermines both the Kantian ideal of public reason and the practical viability of any model of scientific authority. Drawing on Elijah Millgram’s analysis, the chapter demonstrates how specialization creates insurmountable epistemic divides, not only between experts and the public (trans-disciplinarity) but also among experts themselves (inter-disciplinarity), making cross-disciplinary quality control nearly impossible. It argues that this challenge is the ultimate reason why the trust, epistemic authority, and even democratic authority models remain incomplete. The chapter then moves from critique to construction, proposing a novel solution grounded in concepts from Science and Technology Studies. It argues for the deliberate creation of “trading zones” and the cultivation of “interactional expertise” as the necessary infrastructure for restoring public reason. This solution enables substantive public engagement with scientific claims, thereby resolving the “problem of judgment” left open by the democratic authority model. The chapter concludes by advocating for an institutional reform that pluralizes scientific authority, using the IPCC as a case study for how such democratic, problem-oriented bodies can be designed to facilitate genuine, reason-based public criticism.