May 2025 - HPS_EST - Philosophy bulletin board

Invitation: APSE talk by Matteo Vagelli on "Styles of Reasoning" & reading circle

by Miguel de la Riva

Dear all, we warmly invite you to the next APSE (Applied Philosophy of Science and Epistemology) Talk and Reading Circle. The talk will be held by Matteo Vagelli (Ca' Foscari University of Venice). Everybody is welcome. 1. TALK: When: Thursday, 22.05.2025, 15:00 - 17:00 Where: HS 3A, NIG (Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien) Title: Understanding Scientific Knowledge in Terms of Styles of Reasoning Abstract: In this talk, I develop a more precise epistemological account of styles of reasoning (e.g. Crombie 1992; Davidson 2001; Elwick 2007; Hacking 1982, 1992, 2012; Kwa 2011; Radick 2000). I begin by situating the notion in relation to general logical modes of inference—deduction, induction, and abduction— highlighting its distinctive role in shaping scientific rationality. I then try to advance styles of reasoning as potential candidates to come to terms with scientific progress, understood both in relation to justification (Stegenga 2026) and understanding (Déllsen 2016), as well as with scientific pluralism, especially under its “interactive” account (Chang 2024). Next, I refine the distinction between two levels of styles: Level 1, large- scale styles of scientific reasoning (e.g. postulation, experimentation, modelling, taxonomy, statistics, historical development), and Level 2, small- scale inferential strategies operative within specific scientific practices (Bueno 2012). I argue that meaningful philosophical analysis of science requires attention to both levels and propose the addition of a local level—a more context-sensitive scale that captures the dynamic interaction between the two. To substantiate this claim, I examine contemporary research on Alzheimer’s disease (Bemelmans et al. 2016; Hardy & Higgins 1992; Schermer, 2023), illustrating how local configurations of reasoning styles mediate between broader methodological commitments and specific inferential moves. This case is particularly relevant, as it highlights the interplay between epistemic and non-epistemic factors in shaping scientific inquiry. By tracing how styles of reasoning operate across different levels within this research domain, the case study anchors the theoretical reflections and demonstrates how styles serve as a bridge between the logical and the social dimensions of scientific practice. By integrating conceptual refinement with empirical analysis, the talk aims to strengthen the epistemological foundations of the styles of reasoning framework and enhance its relevance for current debates on plurality, understanding, and the dynamics of scientific change. In doing so, it also seeks to render the framework more responsive to at least some of the criticisms that have been levelled against it (e.g. Kusch 2010; Rouse 2011). 2. READING CIRCLE: When: Thursday, 22.05.2025, 13:15 - 14:45 Where: HS 3A, NIG (Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien) We will focus on an article by Matteo Vagelli (attached as PDF): Vagelli, Matteo (2024). Styles of Science and the Pluralist Turn: Between Inclusion and Exclusion. Revue de Synthèse 145 (3-4): 325-363. https:// doi.org/10.1163/19552343-14234053 For further reading regarding the topic: Bueno, Otavio. (2012). “Styles of reasoning: A pluralist view.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43: 657-665. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.shpsa.2012.07.008 Daston, L. and Otte, M. (1991) “Introduction”, Science in Context, 4 (2): 223– 232. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889700000946 Vagelli, M. (2024). “Hacking’s Styles of Scientific Reasoning.” In: Reconsidering Historical Epistemology. French and Anglophone Styles in History and Philosophy of Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-031-61555-9_8 Vagelli, M. (2024). “Styles of Science, Styles of Philosophy.” In: Reconsidering Historical Epistemology. French and Anglophone Styles in History and Philosophy of Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-031-61555-9_9 Wessely, A. (1991) “Transposing ‘Style’ from the History of Art to the History of Science”, Science in Context, 4 (2): 265–278. doi:10.1017/S026988970000096X With best wishes, Miguel de la Riva -- https://bsky.app/profile/m-de-la-riva.bsky.social

2 months, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

Call for Abstracts: Workshop II Adverse Allies in Linz

by Alexander Linsbichler

*Call for Abstracts: Workshop II: Adverse Allies: Logical Empiricism and Austrian Economics* *23.9.-25.9.2025, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria* The FWF ESPRIT research project “Adverse Allies: Logical Empiricism and Austrian Economics”, the Institute of Philosophy and Scientific Method (JKU Linz), the Institute Vienna Circle (University of Vienna), and the Vienna Circle Society host two workshops in 2025. The organisers seek submissions for contributed talks for the second workshop. You can find more information about the workshops here <https://www.jku.at/en/institute-of-philosophy-and-scientific-method/adverse…> . *Deadline for Submissions of Abstracts for Workshop II: 08.06.2025* Notification of Acceptance: 08.07.2025 at the latest *Workshop II in Linz: 23.09.-25.09.2025* Logical empiricism and Austrian economics are arguably the two internationally most influential intellectual movements with Viennese roots. The Vienna Circle and the Austrian School have shaped the development of philosophical, scientific, and political debate in the 20th century. In the 21st century, logical empiricism has undergone extensive re-evaluation, while the Austrian School experiences another revival. Yet, despite numerous connections and interactions between the two movements, their relationship has captured surprisingly sparse attention in the historical and philosophical literature. If an account is provided at all, logical empiricists and Austrian economists are portrayed as philosophically, scientifically, and politically antithetical groups. Among the most frequently mentioned contrastive pairs of catchwords are empiricism vs apriorism, formal methods vs verbal reasoning, and socialism vs classical liberalism. Acknowledging the existence of disagreements between logical empiricism and the Austrian School, recent scholarship has challenged the received view of antithetical opposition by reconstructing hitherto neglected compatibilities and similarities between the two movements. This workshop aims to advance historical as well as systematic discussions on the relationship between logical empiricism and Austrian economics. Contributions that fruitfully inform contemporary debates in philosophy, methodology, politics, or the sciences are particularly welcome. *Topics for workshop II include but are not limited to:· Karl Menger and Felix Kaufmann as mediators between LE and AE· common influences: Frege, Husserl, Kant, Mach, Wittgenstein· non-cognitivism, the fact/value distinction, and the ideal of value-neutrality· the principle of tolerance and polylogism· logical tolerance, methodological tolerance, political liberalism· logicism and the logic of action· naturalism vs antinaturalism, unity vs disunity of science, scientific pluralism and pseudorationality· essentialism and its discontents (Menger, Wieser, Neurath, Popper, Rothbard,…)· defenses of democracy in Viennese Late Enlightenment* *· expertise, education, and democracy* *Abstracts should be 300-400 words (including references, if needed) and submitted here <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe4Oa0v65SfMmKUhTmr88xVx847CuxPpta…>.* *Scientific Committee: *Alexander Linsbichler (chair), Julian Reiss, Georg Schiemer, Friedrich Stadler *Local Organising Committee:* Alexander Linsbichler, Michalis Christou, Robert Frühstückl, Jakob Gschwandtner, Jonatan Magnusson, Pauline Paulik, William Peden, Julian Reiss, Evelin Stockinger *Selected Speakers: *Theo Anders, Daniel Eckert, Karl-Friedrich Israel, Alexander Linsbichler, Elisabeth Nemeth, Reinhard Neck, Michael Oliva Cordoba, Scott Scheall, Anne Siegetsleitner, Lukas Starchl, Adam Tamas Tuboly, Thomas Uebel, Igor Wysocki *Queries:* Alexander Linsbichler (alexander.linsbichler(a)jku.at) Both workshops are supported by the Division of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science and Technology (DLMPST) of the International Union of History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. ------ *Alexander Linsbichler* Institute of Philosophy and Scientific Method (Johannes Kepler University Linz) alexander.linsbichler(a)jku.at Department of Philosophy ( <https://ufind.univie.ac.at/de/person.html?id=47545>University of Vienna) <https://ufind.univie.ac.at/de/person.html?id=47545> alexander.linsbichler(a)univie.ac.at *neu erschienen: Viel mehr <https://www.vandenhoeck-ruprecht-verlage.com/detail/index/sArticle/57805/sC…>als nur <https://www.vandenhoeck-ruprecht-verlage.com/detail/index/sArticle/57805/sC…>Ökonomie <https://www.vandenhoeck-ruprecht-verlage.com/detail/index/sArticle/57805/sC…> (Böhlau, 2022)*

2 months, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

Invitiation to the exhibition: Wien und die Wissenschaftliche Weltauffassung. Orte des Wiener Kreises | June 4 - Sept.19, 2025

by Vienna Circle Society

Dear everyone, The exhibition "Wien und die Wissenschaftliche Weltauffassung. Orte des Wiener Kreises", curated by Friedrich Stadler and Bernhard Hachleitner, will open at the Wienbibliothek on June 4 at 6.30 pm. More information: <https://www.wienbibliothek.at/besuchen-entdecken/ausstellungen/wien-wissens chaftliche-weltauffassung> https://www.wienbibliothek.at/besuchen-entdecken/ausstellungen/wien-wissensc haftliche-weltauffassung The opening is in German, however, the exhibition itself is in English and German. Guided tours will be offered, too. The exhibition will be open until September 19, 2025. With best regards, Zarah Weiss -- Zarah Weiss, M.A. (she/her) Wiener Kreis Gesellschaft Campus der Universität Wien Spitalgasse 2-4 Hof 1, Tür 1.2 1090 Wien, Österreich M: <mailto:zarah.weiss@univie.ac.at> zarah.weiss(a)univie.ac.at

2 months, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

Fwd: Invitation to Bacteriotour on 28th of May

by Sarah Davies

See below for an invitation to a ‘Bacteriotour’ run by some STS students next week! > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Owain Neumann <owain.neumann(a)gmx.de> > Subject: Invitation to Bacteriotour on 28th of May > Date: 22. May 2025 at 19:14:35 CEST > To: tiago.moreira(a)durham.ac.uk, sarah.davies(a)univie.ac.at > > Dear everyone, > > On Wednesday the 28th of May we are inviting you to our Bacteriotour at the Campus of the University of Vienna. The tour will focus on experiencing bacteria and bringing their abundance to consciousness in spaces we walk by regularly. We intend to break up into smaller groups and discover the courtyards of the university campus with an emphasis on the sense of smell. There will be a short introduction at the beginning and a round of reflection in the end. The entire tour will not take more than two hours. > > > When? Wednesday, 28th of May 2025, start 1:30pm (please be on time) > Where? Josef-II.-Denkmal/ Memorial Josef II., Spitalgasse 2, Hof 2, 1090 Wien (in front of the C1/C2 auditoria) > Language? The tour will be moderated in English, whisper-translation to German can be arranged > What to bring? Weather appropriate clothing, something to drink > What to expect? There is no need to prepare for the tour. We will be in the area of the “Altes AKH” walking between the different inner courtyards, the tour will take up to two hours without the guarantee to sit down during that time, lavatories can be found in the different institutes, restaurants, and there is one public restroom in Hof 1. > Any further questions? Just reach out to any of us. If there is a special mobility request let us know in advance, so we can arrange something to accomodate you. > > Please let us know if you plan to participate in the tour either by talking to us directly or contacting us via email: a12409642(a)unet.univie.ac.at > > Hope to see you at the Bacteriotour > Marianne, Owain, Tamara and Wanda ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sarah R Davies (Pronouns: she/her/hers) Professor of Technosciences, Materiality, & Digital Cultures Department of Science and Technology Studies University of Vienna sarah.davies(a)univie.ac.at <mailto:sarah.davies@univie.ac.at> * I am sending this email at a time that suits my workflow. I do not expect a response outside of normal working hours *

3 months

1
0
0 0

REMINDER: APSE talk by Veli Mitova (University of Johannesburg) + reading group on Thursday, May 22, 2025

by Ella Valerie Berger

Dear All, quick reminder that this week's APSE reading cycle (1PM) & talk with Veli Mitova are taking place today in 3A. Link to the event: https://apse.univie.ac.at/news-events/detailsansicht/news/hermeneutical-rep… Best, Ella Berger -------- Originalnachricht -------- Betreff: APSE talk by Veli Mitova (University of Johannesburg) + reading group on Thursday, May 22, 2025 Datum: 15.05.2025 12:45 Von: Ella Valerie Berger <ella.valerie.berger(a)univie.ac.at> An: news(a)lists.philo.at Dear all, we warmly invite you to the next APSE (Applied Philosophy of Science and Epistemology) Talk and Reading Circle. The talk will be held by Veli Mitova (University of Johannesburg). Talk: When: Thursday, 22.05.2025, 15:00 - 17:00 Where: HS 3A, NIG (Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien) Hermeneutical Reparations and the Right to be Known According to an increasingly influential view in social epistemology, we owe victims of gross human rights violations not only economic and social reparations, but also reparations for the distinctively epistemic wrongs that attend such violations (Lackey 2022). One type of epistemic reparation is honouring victims' 'right to be known' (_ibid._)--their right to have their true story known. This talk has two aims. First, I argue that the right to be known cannot be successfully exercised in hermeneutically unjust environments, i.e., environments in which the explanatory and epistemic resources of the oppressed do not feature in the mainstream knowledge economy (Dotson 2012, Fricker 2007). Thus, the successful exercise of the right to be known requires what I call hermeneutical reparations. The second aim of the talk is to sketch three distinct kinds of hermeneutical reparations. If the arguments work, we will have put into dialogue two bodies of scholarship that have, curiously, not yet talked to each other. The dialogue will not only be of mutual theoretical benefit to both, but will also up our chances of attaining epistemic justice. Speaker Bio Veli Mitova is Professor in Philosophy and Director of the African Centre for Epistemology and Philosophy of Science [1 [1]] at the University of Johannesburg. She works at the intersection of epistemology, ethics, and social epistemology. She is the author of _Believable Evidence_ [2 [2]](CUP 2017), and the editor of _Epistemic Reparations and the Right to Be Known_ [3 [3]] (forthcoming SI of _Philosophical Studies_), _Epistemic Decolonisation_ [4 [4]](2020) and of _The Factive Turn in Epistemology_ [5 [5]] (CUP 2018). Before joining the University of Johannesburg in 2015, Veli taught and researched at Universität Wien, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de México, Rhodes University (her alma mater), and Cambridge (where she obtained her PhD). Reading Circle: When: Thursday, 22.05.2025, 13:00 - 15:00 Where: HS 3A, NIG (Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien) We will focus our discussion on a forthcoming article by Veli Mitova (attached pdf): Mitova, V. (2025). Decolonial Epistemic-Authority Reparations. _Episteme_. DOI: 10.1017/epi.2025.2 As introduction to Epistemic Reparations, Veli Mitova suggests the following article: Lackey J. (2022). 'Epistemic Reparations and the Right to Be Known.' _Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association_ 96, 54-89. As introduction to Hermeneutical Injustice: Fricker, M. (2007). Chapter 7: Hermeneutical Injustice. _Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing_. New York: Oxford University Press. Introducing the concept of Contributory Injustice: Dotson, K. (2012). A cautionary tale: on limiting epistemic oppression. _Frontiers - A Journal of Women's Studies_ (1): 24-47. And the latest reading, distinguishing 3 kinds of Hermeneutical Injustice: Catala, A. (2025). Chapter 3: Deliberative Impasses, White Ignoring, and Hermeneutical Domination. _The Dynamics of Epistemic Injustice: Situating Epistemic Power and Agency. _New York: Oxford University Press. All the Best, Ella Berger and Vinzenz Fischer Links: ------ [1] https://www.uj.ac.za/faculties/humanities/departments-2/philosophy/philosop… [2] http://www.cambridge.org/9781107188600 [3] https://link.springer.com/collections/jhbeccifed [4] https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rppa20/49/2?nav=tocList [5] https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/factive-turn-in-epistemology/A12342A58… -- Ella Berger (she/her or they/them) Department of Philosophy University of Vienna Links: ------ [1] https://www.uj.ac.za/faculties/humanities/departments-2/philosophy/philosop… [2] http://www.cambridge.org/9781107188600 [3] https://link.springer.com/collections/jhbeccifed [4] https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rppa20/49/2?nav=tocList [5] https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/factive-turn-in-epistemology/A12342A58…

3 months

1
0
0 0

Vienna STS Talks x INNORES Talk by Sarah Schönbauer

by Katrin Hackl

We are happy to invite you to our 9th talk of the Vienna STS Talk Series in 2025S: [cid:image001.png@01DBB438.76AD78D0]<https://sts.univie.ac.at/news-events/details/news/innores-talk-by-sarah-sch…> Best wishes, Katrin Hackl __________ Mag. Katrin Hackl Research Support & Communication Department of Science and Technology Studies University of Vienna Universitätsstraße 7 /II/ 6th floor (NIG) 1010 Vienna / Austria Tel.: 0043-1-4277-496007 [cid:image002.jpg@01DBB438.76AD78D0]<https://sts.univie.ac.at/>

3 months

1
1
0 0

Mini Workshop on AI and Computing TODAY, 17:00 - 19:15, NIG 3D

by Alexander Gschwendtner

Dear all, The Philosophy of Science Group at the Department of Philosophy cordially invites you to this mini workshop, taking place *today, 17:00 - 19:15 at NIG, Room 3D*. You can also join via Zoom: https://univienna.zoom.us/j/61325403480?pwd=csc5Ipp2tkz9MjwbvFioVELyphZW6u.1 *Mini workshop on AI and computing — 20.05.2025* Lecture Room 3D (Room D0316, 3rd floor) Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna Organized by: Univ.-Prof. Tarja Knuuttila 17:00 -18:00 Dr. Nick Wiggershaus (University of Lille) * * *Computational Artifacts and the Problem of Creation* As computer science integrates principles from logic, engineering, and physics, the ontological status of its core entities, such as computer programs, remains contested. Programs are often characterized as hybrids that have a “dual nature.” In attempts to untangle such hybrids, philosophers of computing have applied the concept of ‘technical artifact’ (combining teleological function and physical structure) to computing. While productive, it overlooks a notorious problem from the philosophy of art: the /Problem of Creation/, which asks how abstract objects like musical works or novels can be brought into existence through concrete human activity. I argue that, like repeatable artworks, computational artifacts have different representational modes (e.g., symbolic, mathematical, diagrammatic) and implementational media (e.g., ink on paper, chalk on a whiteboard, electrical signals, punched cards, etc.). Just as a novel or a musical work is not identical to any one performance or copy, a computer program persists across implementations. This invites a philosophical conundrum: How can programmers /create /abstract objects that are not located in space or time? By appropriating solutions to the Problem of Creation, we gain alternative ways to characterize the ontological status of programs and other computing objects. I conclude by exploring whether we can understand computational artifacts as /abstract /technical artifacts. 18:15-19:15 Dr. Laura Savolainen (University of Helsinki) *Emperor’s New Crowds: “Untrustworthy” Workers and “Ground Truth”* Ground-truth datasets are supposed to nail down facts about the “world” represented by data, so that machine learning models trained on them will behave reliably in that same world. Yet when annotation is outsourced to platform workers whom engineers do not know, and often mistrust, how is such reliability achieved or even imagined? Based on 27 interviews with machine learning researchers and practitioners, this paper investigates how ground-truth datasets are stabilised when 1) annotators are positioned as unreliable non-experts, 2) recognised domain experts are prohibitively expensive, and 3) the platform architecture itself suppresses deliberation, feedback, and learning. Given these constraints, I illustrate ground-truthing as a canny, iterative practice shaped by task design choices, aggregation methods, disciplinary conventions, and the affective politics of trusting data supplied by unknown workers. Rather than reflecting the world, the resulting datasets operationalize narrowly bounded problem formulations that satisfy performance goals ‘well enough’ for downstream modelling. By analysing the epistemic hierarchies, organizational constraints and judgment calls embedded in these pipelines, the discussion offers a concrete case for re-evaluating realist assumptions about data, evidence, and representation in contemporary AI research. Moreover, the analysis opens normative space for re-imagining data pipelines around more transparent authority structures and richer human feedback for more reliable processes and outputs. -- Alexander Gschwendtner Universität Wien Institut für Philosophie Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien – Raum A0322 https://ufind.univie.ac.at/de/person.html?id=1009319

3 months

1
0
0 0

Mini workshop on AI and computing 20.05. 17:00 - 19:15, NIG 3D

by Knuuttila, Tarja Tellervo

Dear EST students and supervisors, The Philosophy of Science Group at the Department of Philosophy cordially invites you to this mini workshop. (Please note that the order of the presentations has changed.) Best, Tarja --- Mini workshop on AI and computing — 20.05.2025 Lecture Room 3D (Room D0316, 3rd floor) Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna Organized by: Univ.-Prof. Tarja Knuuttila 17:00 -18:00 Dr. Nick Wiggershaus (University of Lille) Computational Artifacts and the Problem of Creation As computer science integrates principles from logic, engineering, and physics, the ontological status of its core entities, such as computer programs, remains contested. Programs are often characterized as hybrids that have a “dual nature.” In attempts to untangle such hybrids, philosophers of computing have applied the concept of ‘technical artifact’ (combining teleological function and physical structure) to computing. While productive, it overlooks a notorious problem from the philosophy of art: the Problem of Creation, which asks how abstract objects like musical works or novels can be brought into existence through concrete human activity. I argue that, like repeatable artworks, computational artifacts have different representational modes (e.g., symbolic, mathematical, diagrammatic) and implementational media (e.g., ink on paper, chalk on a whiteboard, electrical signals, punched cards, etc.). Just as a novel or a musical work is not identical to any one performance or copy, a computer program persists across implementations. This invites a philosophical conundrum: How can programmers create abstract objects that are not located in space or time? By appropriating solutions to the Problem of Creation, we gain alternative ways to characterize the ontological status of programs and other computing objects. I conclude by exploring whether we can understand computational artifacts as abstract technical artifacts. 18:15-19:15 Dr. Laura Savolainen (University of Helsinki) Emperor’s New Crowds: “Untrustworthy” Workers and “Ground Truth” Ground-truth datasets are supposed to nail down facts about the “world” represented by data, so that machine learning models trained on them will behave reliably in that same world. Yet when annotation is outsourced to platform workers whom engineers do not know, and often mistrust, how is such reliability achieved or even imagined? Based on 27 interviews with machine learning researchers and practitioners, this paper investigates how ground-truth datasets are stabilised when 1) annotators are positioned as unreliable non-experts, 2) recognised domain experts are prohibitively expensive, and 3) the platform architecture itself suppresses deliberation, feedback, and learning. Given these constraints, I illustrate ground-truthing as a canny, iterative practice shaped by task design choices, aggregation methods, disciplinary conventions, and the affective politics of trusting data supplied by unknown workers. Rather than reflecting the world, the resulting datasets operationalize narrowly bounded problem formulations that satisfy performance goals ‘well enough’ for downstream modelling. By analysing the epistemic hierarchies, organizational constraints and judgment calls embedded in these pipelines, the discussion offers a concrete case for re-evaluating realist assumptions about data, evidence, and representation in contemporary AI research. Moreover, the analysis opens normative space for re-imagining data pipelines around more transparent authority structures and richer human feedback for more reliable processes and outputs.

3 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

APSE talk by Veli Mitova (University of Johannesburg) + reading group on Thursday, May 22, 2025

by Ella Valerie Berger

Dear all, we warmly invite you to the next APSE (Applied Philosophy of Science and Epistemology) Talk and Reading Circle. The talk will be held by Veli Mitova (University of Johannesburg). Talk: When: Thursday, 22.05.2025, 15:00 - 17:00 Where: HS 3A, NIG (Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien) Hermeneutical Reparations and the Right to be Known According to an increasingly influential view in social epistemology, we owe victims of gross human rights violations not only economic and social reparations, but also reparations for the distinctively epistemic wrongs that attend such violations (Lackey 2022). One type of epistemic reparation is honouring victims' 'right to be known' (_ibid._)--their right to have their true story known. This talk has two aims. First, I argue that the right to be known cannot be successfully exercised in hermeneutically unjust environments, i.e., environments in which the explanatory and epistemic resources of the oppressed do not feature in the mainstream knowledge economy (Dotson 2012, Fricker 2007). Thus, the successful exercise of the right to be known requires what I call hermeneutical reparations. The second aim of the talk is to sketch three distinct kinds of hermeneutical reparations. If the arguments work, we will have put into dialogue two bodies of scholarship that have, curiously, not yet talked to each other. The dialogue will not only be of mutual theoretical benefit to both, but will also up our chances of attaining epistemic justice. Speaker Bio Veli Mitova is Professor in Philosophy and Director of the African Centre for Epistemology and Philosophy of Science [1] at the University of Johannesburg. She works at the intersection of epistemology, ethics, and social epistemology. She is the author of _Believable Evidence_ [2](CUP 2017), and the editor of _Epistemic Reparations and the Right to Be Known_ [3] (forthcoming SI of _Philosophical Studies_), _Epistemic Decolonisation_ [4](2020) and of _The Factive Turn in Epistemology_ [5] (CUP 2018). Before joining the University of Johannesburg in 2015, Veli taught and researched at Universität Wien, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de México, Rhodes University (her alma mater), and Cambridge (where she obtained her PhD). Reading Circle: When: Thursday, 22.05.2025, 13:00 - 15:00 Where: HS 3A, NIG (Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien) We will focus our discussion on a forthcoming article by Veli Mitova (attached pdf): Mitova, V. (2025). Decolonial Epistemic-Authority Reparations. _Episteme_. DOI: 10.1017/epi.2025.2 As introduction to Epistemic Reparations, Veli Mitova suggests the following article: Lackey J. (2022). 'Epistemic Reparations and the Right to Be Known.' _Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association_ 96, 54-89. As introduction to Hermeneutical Injustice: Fricker, M. (2007). Chapter 7: Hermeneutical Injustice. _Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing_. New York: Oxford University Press. Introducing the concept of Contributory Injustice: Dotson, K. (2012). A cautionary tale: on limiting epistemic oppression. _Frontiers - A Journal of Women's Studies_ (1): 24-47. And the latest reading, distinguishing 3 kinds of Hermeneutical Injustice: Catala, A. (2025). Chapter 3: Deliberative Impasses, White Ignoring, and Hermeneutical Domination. _The Dynamics of Epistemic Injustice: Situating Epistemic Power and Agency. _New York: Oxford University Press. All the Best, Ella Berger and Vinzenz Fischer Links: ------ [1] https://www.uj.ac.za/faculties/humanities/departments-2/philosophy/philosop… [2] http://www.cambridge.org/9781107188600 [3] https://link.springer.com/collections/jhbeccifed [4] https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rppa20/49/2?nav=tocList [5] https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/factive-turn-in-epistemology/A12342A58… Links: ------ [1] https://www.uj.ac.za/faculties/humanities/departments-2/philosophy/philosop… [2] http://www.cambridge.org/9781107188600 [3] https://link.springer.com/collections/jhbeccifed [4] https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rppa20/49/2?nav=tocList [5] https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/factive-turn-in-epistemology/A12342A58…

3 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

Vienna STS Talks x FutureSpace Talk by Victor Buchli

by Katrin Hackl

We are happy to invite you to our 8th talk of the Vienna STS Talk Series in 2025S: [cid:image001.png@01DBB509.6DDB66F0]<https://sts.univie.ac.at/news-events/details/news/futurespace-talk-by-victo…> Best wishes, Katrin Hackl __________ Mag. Katrin Hackl Research Support & Communication Department of Science and Technology Studies University of Vienna Universitätsstraße 7 /II/ 6th floor (NIG) 1010 Vienna / Austria Tel.: 0043-1-4277-496007 [cid:image002.jpg@01DBB509.6DDB66F0]<https://sts.univie.ac.at/>

3 months, 1 week

1
1
0 0