- HPS_EST - Philosophy bulletin board

IVC Talk: Korbinian Friedl (IVC Fellow) on "Leitgeb’s new verifiability criterion, probability, and thick concepts", June 26, 5.30 pm

by Zarah Weiss

Dear all, our next speaker in the Philosophy of Science Colloquium organized by the Institute Vienna Circle is Korbinian Friedl (IVC Fellow), who will give a talk on June 26, 5.30-7 pm. Please note that this talk is later than usually! All are welcome! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Philosophy of Science Colloquium TALK: Korbinian Friedl (IVC Fellow) LEITGEB’S NEW VERIFIABILITY CRITERION, PROBABILITY, AND THICK CONCEPTS Philosophy of Science Colloquium The Institute Vienna Circle holds a Philosophy of Science Colloquium with talks by our present fellows. Date: 26/06/2025 Time: 17h30 Venue: New Institute Building (NIG), Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien, HS 3A Abstract: Hannes Leitgeb's recent paper "Vindicating the Verifiability Criterion" presents a new attempt at drawing out the exact sense in which (something like) verifiability is properly seen as the arbiter of meaningfulness. He proposes a parametrized, probabilistic verifiability criterion "scheme". As one of the advantages of his new criterion, compared to the "original" verifiability criterion, he advertises its greater flexibility, and the ability to account for, and make explicit (in terms of different parametrizations), the different ways in which certain statements can be meaningful for different communities. The talk will present Leitgeb's ideas and raise to questions for them:1. One issue with the original criterion is the strong dichotomy between fact and value it entrenches, which e.g. Putnam argues makes it impossible for it to account for the specific way in which Thick Ethical Concepts are meaningful. Does the greater flexibility of Leitgeb's criterion allow it to give a satisfying account of judgments involving such terms?2. How does Leitgeb's probabilistic criterion interact with different concepts of probability? Are there specific requirements on a concept of probability which are necessary for the criterion to achieve its semantic bite?

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Workshop: Logical Empiricism and American Pragmatism on Values and Democracy | June 15-17

by Zarah Weiss

Workshop: Logical Empiricism and American Pragmatism on Values and Democracy June 15 (afternoon), 16, & 17, 2025. University of Vienna Venue: SR 3A (Neues Institutsgebäude, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna) No registration needed. Everyone is invited to attend. Sunday, June 15 14:0015:00 Christian Damböck (University of Vienna): Toward a Shift in Narrative: Carnap, Dewey, and Lewis on Values and Practical Decisions. 15:3016:30 Sander Verhaegh (Tilburg University): Pragmatism and Logical Empiricism on Values: A Cultural Analysis 17:0018:00 Christoph Limbeck-Lilienau (University of Vienna): Dewey versus Stevenson on Values 18:3019:30 Cheryl Misak (University of Toronto): The Battle over Value: Dewey and the Unity of Science Monday, June 16 10:00-11:00 Thomas Uebel (University of Manchester): The Scientific World-Conception Reconstituted and Compared with Dewey's Theory of Valuation 11:3012:30 Claudia Cristalli (Tilburg University): Being "of service to man in his characteristic activity as a valuer": the scientific study of values in Charles W. Morris 14:3015:30 Roberto Gronda (University of Pisa): Abraham Kaplan and the American axiological tradition 16:0017:00 Lucas Baccarat (University of Vienna): Bentley and Neurath on Experience 17:3018:30 Alan Richardson (University of British Columbia): Pluralisms in the US 1900-1950 and Horace Kallen's criticism of Neurath Tuesday, June 17 10:00-11:00 Georg Schiemer (University of Vienna): Carnap and Kelsen's Pure Theory of Law 11:3012:30 Flavia Padovani (Drexel University): Hans Reichenbach and C.I. Lewis on the pragmatic a priori 14:3015:30 Friedrich Stadler (University of Vienna): Harvard 1939: The Interaction of European and American Pragmatism 16:0017:00 Matthias Neuber (University of Mainz): Philipp Frank on Values, Democracy, and the "Humanistic Background of Science" 17:3018:30 Adam Tuboly (Hungarian Academy of Science): From General Education in a Free Society to Science in a Free Society: Nagel, Kuhn, and Feyerabend While previous research at the Institute Vienna Circle has focused mainly on the encounters between American pragmatism and logical empiricism in the European context in the decades before and after 1900, this workshop will be devoted to developments in the United States between the 1930s and 1960s. In addition, the workshop will focus on the philosophy of values, law, and democracy as developed in the exchanges and sometimes conflicts between key members of the logical empiricist movement, including Rudolf Carnap, Otto Neurath, Hans Reichenbach, and Hans Kelsen, on the one hand, and pragmatists such as C.I. Lewis, John Dewey, Ernest Nagel, Abraham Kaplan, and Charles Morris, on the other. Here, broad agreement on the understanding of science and democracy is accompanied by sometimes sharp disagreement on the philosophy of values, more precisely, the tension between non-cognitivism and verificationism regarding values. The aim of this workshop is not only to reconstruct these tensions, but also to contextualize them historically, to try to resolve them systematically, and to build bridges to the contemporary discourse on the philosophy of law, politics, and deliberative democracy. On the other side of the political spectrum, the liberal discourse in the US is compared to the fascist discourse on politics and law as it developed in Europe, and in particular in Nazi Germany. Literature: Christian Damböck (2025), "Noncognitive Deliberation. The Political Legacy of Logical Empiricism", Erkenntnis. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-024-00911-7> https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-024-00911-7 David Dyzenhaus (2023), The Long Arc of Legality. Hobbes, Kelsen, Hart, CUP. Christoph Limbeck-Lilienau (2010), "Rudolf Carnap und die Philosophie in Amerika. Logischer Empirismus, Pragmatismus, Realismus", Friedrich Stadler (ed.): Vertreibung, Transformation und Rückkehr der Wissenschaftstheorie, Lit Verlag, 85-164. Giovanni Maddalena and Friedrich Stadler (eds.) (2019), European Pragmatism, in: European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, <https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.1459> https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.1459. Cheryl Misak (2000), Truth, Politics, Morality. Pragmatism and Deliberation, Routledge. Cheryl Misak (2015), The American Pragmatists, OUP. Sami Pihlström, Friedrich Stadler, and Niels Weidtmann (eds.) (2017), Logical Empiricism and Pragmatism, Springer. George Reisch (2005), How the Cold War Transformed Philosophy of Science. To the Icy Slopes of Logic, CUP. Alan Richardson (2003), "Logical Empiricism, American Pragmatism, and the Fate of Scientific Philosophy in North America", Gary Hardcastle and Alan Richardson (eds.), Logical Empiricism in North America, University of Minnesota Press, 1-24. Alan Richardson (2007), "Carnapian Pragmatism", Michael Friedman and Richard Creath (eds.): The Cambridge Companion to Carnap, CUP, 295-315. Thomas Uebel (2015), "American Pragmatism and the Vienna Circle: The Early Years", JHAP 3:3, 1-35. Sander Verhaegh (2020), "Coming to America: Carnap, Reichenbach and the Great Intellectual Migration. Part I: Rudolf Carnap/Part II: Hans Reichenbach", JHAP 8:11, 1-47. Organizers: Lucas Baccarat, Christian Damböck, and Christoph Limbeck-Lilienau Hosts: Institute Vienna Circle, Vienna Circle Society Language: English

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Workshop 13-14 June: On Writing About Philosopher’s Lives

by Zarah Weiss

You are cordially invited to the upcoming workshop at the Institute Vienna Circle: Life and Work: On Writing About Philosopher’s Lives 13-14 June 2025 Room 3A Neues Institutsgebäude (NIG), Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien How do we write about the lives of philosophers, and what brings us to write and read philosophical biographies? Throughout its history, the discipline of philosophy was shaped by human interaction and personal experience as much as by hard thinking of individuals interacting with the world solely through written word. Trends in intellectual migration (or lack thereof) led to differences between philosophical traditions of different countries. There are multiple examples of friendships and personal networks enabling philosophers to flourish intellectually and in their careers; personal conflicts and character clashes could also nearly break said careers. In the relatively recent past, we have seen women enter academic philosophy, sometimes bringing with them perspectives and insights born directly from their personal experience. Their lives as women and their academic careers were inextricably linked. This kind of research and writing becomes particularly relevant when philosophy becomes interested in its history not only from a purely conceptual perspective, but as a history of its people and institutions, which existed in a particular time and place. The practice of biographical writing can both result from such interest, and help satisfy it. The workshop is organised by the MSCA Project "What was and what could have been: Janina Hosiasson-Lindenbaum’s role in the philosophy of probability", led by Marta Sznajder Programme Friday, 13 June 9:45 Welcome and introduction 10:00 -11:00 Christian Damböck, Rudolf Carnap in Chicago. The transformation of antimetaphysics 11:30 – 12:30 Patricia Grill, “Revered Miss”: Otto Neurath’s Early Letters and Reflections on Ellen Key 14:30 – 15:30 Matteo Collodel, False Memories and True Lies: Personal, institutional and philosophical issues in intellectual biography writing – The case of Paul K. Feyerabend 16:00 – 17:00 Zofia Hałęza, Philosophy beyond the text: women as architects of intellectual space Saturday, 14 June 10:00 – 11:00 Sophia Connell, Early analytic women philosophers in Cambridge 11:30 – 12:30 Alan Richardson, When is biography philosophical? Lessons from the life of Hans Reichenbach 14:30 – 15:30 Cheryl Misak, Incorporating Technical Material in an Intellectual Biography 16:00 – 18:00 Marta Sznajder, From a bag of facts to a narrative – Workshopping the biography of Janina Hosiason-Lindenbaum ---- Marta Sznajder Marie Skłodowska-Curie Fellow Institute Vienna Circle University of Vienna www.martasznajder.com <http://www.martasznajder.com> marta.sznajder(a)univie.ac.at <mailto:marta.sznajder@univie.ac.at>

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Reminder: 8th Arthur Pap Lecture | Luca Oliva | Kinds of A Priori | June 12 Vienna and online

by Zarah Weiss

The Institute Vienna Circle and the Vienna Circle Society cordially invite you to the 8th Arthur Pap Lecture Luca Oliva (University of Houston) Kinds of A Priori Thursday, June 12, 2025 5 pm Aula am Campus University of Vienna Hof 1, Eingang 1.11 Spitalgasse 2-4 1090 Vienna For those who can't make it to Vienna, the event will also be streamed via YouTube: <https://www.youtube.com/live/DMGipA4G1ks> Link Registration for the event in Vienna: <mailto:vcs@univie.ac.at> vcs(a)univie.ac.at No registration fee Abstract In 1944, Arthur Pap analyzed different kinds of "a priori" beyond the scientific statements that served as the standard reference for the logical empiricist criticism of the Kantian model. His analysis focuses on the meanings of formal, material, and functional a priori, engaging primarily with the arguments of Aristotle, Kant, Schlick, Wittgenstein, Dewey, and Carnap. In this context, Pap advocates for the reducibility of Kant's synthetic a priori to the material a priori, while also arguing for the consistency of the latter with the functional meaning of the a priori. Oliva's talk will center on the first two meanings. It will specifically analyze Pap's views on Kant's synthetic-analytic distinction, Leibniz's notion of true sentences as identities (which relates to Wittgenstein's notion of tautology), and Hilbert's notion of implicit definitions - adopted by Schlick and defended by Einstein. Oliva will also consider Pap's later writings from 1949 and 1957 and assess the claims concerning analyticity, necessity, and material implication they developed. Supporting references will include works by Shieh (2006), Stump (2011, 2021), Mormann (2021), and Limbeck-Lilienau (2025). Short Bio Luca Oliva is an assistant professor and the program director of Liberal Studies at the University of Houston. His research interests lie in epistemology and philosophy of mathematics but also involve ethics and metaethics. He has primarily published on issues of analytic Kantianism, the a priori in logical empiricism (including Wittgenstein), and Rickert's abstract objects and normativity. His articles have appeared in the Kantian Review, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and collections published by Cambridge University Press, the North American Kant Society, and De Gruyter. Oliva teaches theories of knowledge and truth, as well as ethics. In recent years, he has been a lecturer at the University of Vienna (2019) and the Institute Vienna Circle (2015, 2017), an academic visitor at the University of Oxford (2016, 2017), and a visiting professor at the Universities of Insubria (2024) and Bergamo (2015, 2022) in Italy.Since 2024, Oliva has co-organized the Reconstructing Carnap webinar series affiliated with the University of Florence. In 2023, he also initiated the Ethics and Normativity Seminar Series at the University of Houston.

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

APSE Reading Talk & Reading Circle on June 12 - Maria Baghramian: Disagreement and Trust – the case from democracy and sconce

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 Maria Baghramian (University College Dublin). Talk: When: Thursday, 12.06.2025, 15:00 - 17:00 Where: HS 3A, NIG (Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien) Title: Disagreement and Trust - the case from democracy and sconce Abstract Trust in democratic institutions has been in steep decline across many western countries. Trust in science and scientists, at least in some specific areas of science, has also come under question. It is widely accepted that a certain level of public trust is essential to any well-functioning democracy. Trust in science, in so far as scientific findings have a role in the public life, is also crucial. A great deal has been written about the so called "crisis of trust" in earth of these domains. Less has been said about the connections and the structural similarities or dissimilarities between the two. This paper is an attempt to investigate the parallels between trust in science and in democratic politics by focusing on the deep and at times widespread disagreements present in both. I will argue that while disagreement in both politics and science is necessary for their proper functioning, certain types of disagreement can also lead to disfunction and break down of trust. I follow a familiar distinction between alethic, normative and identity based sources of disagreement using recent work by Michael Lynch (2025) and Pippa Norris (2019) as my examples of these differing approaches and argue that the corrosive type of disagreement that leads to breakdown of trust should be understood in terms of the commitments people have and develop in their lifetime rather than their beliefs in truths or values. Commitments have affective and conative features that are not always present in mere acts of believing (See for instance Bernard Williams 1981 and Timothy Scanlon, 1998). The connections between trust and commitments are also stronger and deeper than those with beliefs (see for instance John Holton, 1994). I conclude by auguring that a focus on disagreement between commitments, both normative and alethic, could be a more fruitful way of looking at the relationships between disagreement and trust in politics and in science. Bio Professor Maria Baghramian is Full Professor of American Philosophy at UCD School of Philosophy and a co-director of the UCD Post Graduate Programme in Cognitive Science, which she co-founded in 2000. She has held visiting posts in Harvard, MIT, University of Yerevan, Institut Jean Nicod, Paris and in various universities in China. She was a Fulbright Senior Scholar in Harvard in 2013. Baghramian was elected to the Royal Irish Academy in 2010 and to its Council for two consecutive terms. In June 2022 she was elected to the Academia Europaea (The Academy of Europe). In 2022, she was Highly Commended in the Irish Research Council Researcher of the Year Awards. She is, with the astrophysicist Luke Drury, the Principal Investigator of a research project on peer expert disagreement "When Experts Disagree" (WEXD), funded by the Irish Research Council. Currently, she is the coordinator and project leader of PERITIA - Policy, Expertise and Trust in Action - a Horizon 2020 multi-disciplinary research project funding of 3 million euro from the European Commission. In the European arena, Baghramian been an active member of three working groups on topics of truth, trust and science with the All European Academies (ALLEA) and its science and policy mechanism SAPEA. Internationally, she is a member of the steering committee of the International Federation of Philosophical Societies, a member of the Programme Committee of the 2024 World Congress, and a member of the International Cooperation Committee of the American Philosophical Association. She also has had numerous academic engagements in China and Armenia. Baghramian has also organised over 40 international conferences, workshops and public lectures and is the founder and two term President of the Society for Women in Philosophy in Ireland and representative of Scholars at Risk programme. Baghramian has published extensively, including 14 edited and authored books, on topics from epistemology and contemporary American philosophy. She was also the editor of the International Journal of Philosophical Studies (2004-14) and the co-editor of Contemporary Pragmatism (2016-2021). Reading Circle: When: Thursday, 12.06.2025, 13:15 - 15:00 Where: HS 3A, NIG (Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien) We will focus our discussion on a forthcoming review article by Maria Baghramian and Silvia Caprioglio Panizza (attached doc): Baghramian, Maria and Silvia Caprioglio Panizza (forthcoming) "Expertise and the Ethics of Trust: A Review" In: _ETICA Yearbook_. Since the article is a review and a very good introduction to the topic, I only suggest these two short papers as additional introduction: Croce, M., & Baghramian, M. (2024). Experts - part I: What they are and how to identify them. _Philosophy Compass_, e13009. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.13009 [1] Croce, M., & Baghramian, M. (2024). Experts--Part II: The sources of epistemic authority. _Philosophy Compass_, e70005. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.70005 [2] For further reading regarding the topic: Lynch, M. (2025). _On Truth in Politics: Why Democracy Demands It_. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi-org.uaccess.univie.ac.at/10.1515/9780691231945 Hardwig, J. (1991). The role of trust in knowledge. _The Journal of Philosophy_, _88_(12), 693-708. Warren, M. E. (Ed.). (1999). _Democracy and Trust._Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511659959 All the best, Ella Berger and Vinzenz Fischer, on behalf of the APSE team Links: ------ [1] https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.13009 [2] https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.70005

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Invitation: 8th Arthur Pap Lecture | Luca Oliva | Kinds of A Priori | June 12 Vienna and online

by Wiener Kreis Gesellschaft

The Institute Vienna Circle and the Vienna Circle Society cordially invite you to the *8th Arthur Pap Lecture* *Luca Oliva (University of Houston)* Kinds of A Priori *Thursday, June 12, 2025** *5 pm** Aula am Campus University of Vienna Hof 1, Eingang 1.11 Spitalgasse 2-4 1090 Vienna *For those who can't make it to Vienna, the event will also be streamed via YouTube:Link <https://www.youtube.com/live/DMGipA4G1ks>* Registration:vcs@univie.ac.at <mailto:vcs@univie.ac.at> No registration fee Abstract In 1944, Arthur Pap analyzed different kinds of "a priori" beyond the scientific statements that served as the standard reference for the logical empiricist criticism of the Kantian model. His analysis focuses on the meanings of formal, material, and functional a priori, engaging primarily with the arguments of Aristotle, Kant, Schlick, Wittgenstein, Dewey, and Carnap. In this context, Pap advocates for the reducibility of Kant's synthetic a priori to the material a priori, while also arguing for the consistency of the latter with the functional meaning of the a priori. Oliva's talk will center on the first two meanings. It will specifically analyze Pap's views on Kant's synthetic-analytic distinction, Leibniz's notion of true sentences as identities (which relates to Wittgenstein's notion of tautology), and Hilbert's notion of implicit definitions – adopted by Schlick and defended by Einstein. Oliva will also consider Pap's later writings from 1949 and 1957 and assess the claims concerning analyticity, necessity, and material implication they developed. Supporting references will include works by Shieh (2006), Stump (2011, 2021), Mormann (2021), and Limbeck-Lilienau (2025). Short Bio Luca Olivais an assistant professor and the program director of /Liberal Studies/ at the University of Houston. His research interests lie in epistemology and philosophy of mathematics but also involve ethics and metaethics. He has primarily published on issues of analytic Kantianism, the a priori in logical empiricism (including Wittgenstein), and Rickert's abstract objects and normativity. His articles have appeared in the /Kantian Review/, the /Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy/, and collections published by Cambridge University Press, the North American Kant Society, and De Gruyter. Oliva teaches theories of knowledge and truth, as well as ethics. In recent years, he has been a lecturer at the University of Vienna (2019) and the Institute Vienna Circle (2015, 2017), an academic visitor at the University of Oxford (2016, 2017), and a visiting professor at the Universities of Insubria (2024) and Bergamo (2015, 2022) in Italy.Since 2024, Oliva has co-organized the /Reconstructing Carnap/ webinar series affiliated with the University of Florence. In 2023, he also initiated the /Ethics and Normativity Seminar Series/ at the University of Houston.

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Book Launch: Ulrike Felt 'Academic Times: Contesting the Chronopolitics of Reseach' (Palgrave Macmillan, 2025)

by Katrin Hackl

We are happy to invite you to the book launch of 'Academic Times' and the chronopolitics of research! 'Academic Times: Contesting the Chronopolitics of Reseach' (Palgrave Macmillan, 2025) is the new book by Ulrike Felt on the chronopolitics that shapes academic life and the production of knowledge in universities She discusses her new book with Alan Irwin (Copenhagen Business School & Aarhus University). Come and join us for an interesting discussion and a social gathering afterwards! [cid:image001.png@01DBD535.ADEB8D00]<https://sts.univie.ac.at/news-events/details/news/book-launch-ulrike-felt-a…> 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@01DBD535.ADEB8D00]<https://sts.univie.ac.at/>

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Science communication public presentations

by Sarah Davies

Dear all, we will again host an online public presentation of projects developed in the Science Communication Laboratories course <https://ufind.univie.ac.at/en/course.html?lv=233062&semester=2025S> on Tuesday 17 June, 12:30-13:30. This year we have projects oriented to misinformation, urban wellbeing, and relationship to land, using a range of interactive formats. Please join us to hear about them! You can sign up via the link in the attached flyer. If you have any questions let me know! Sarah ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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 *

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Besondere Einladungen diese Woche!

by Anna Echterhölter

Liebe Studierende des MA EST*, * * * in dieser Woche gibt es einige besondere Angebote in der Wissenschafts- und Medizingeschichte, die auch die Frauen- und Geschlechtergeschichte sowie die Wissenschaftsphilosophie betreffen. Neben dem Beitrag von Sophie Veigl, der sich hoffentlich schon herumgesprochen hat, ist beispielsweise die Diversitätsbeauftragte der UCLA zu Besuch, die eingehend zur Entstehung des Begriffes "gender" im Kontext der Endokrinologie publiziert hat (Podiumsdiskussion und Vorlesungsbeitrag). Zudem gibt es die einmalige Gelegenheit die Initiatorin des berühmten "The Making and the Knowing" Projektes an der Columbia University in Wien zu hören, in dem frühneuzeitliches Experimentalwissen nachgeprobt wurde. Die Vernetzungstreffen bieten auch ungewöhnlich gute Einblicke in die Medizingeschichte der MedUni, die in dem eben neu renovierten Josephinum eine Veranstaltung anbietet. Mit bestem Gruß Anna Echterhölter 2.6.2025 *Andreas Heinz (Charité Berlin):* Das kolonialisierte Gehirn – Zum Verständnis psychischer Krankheit im historischen Wandel Datum: Montag 2. Juni 2025, 18:00 Uhr Ort: Josephinum – Historischer Hörsaal, Währinger Straße 25, 1090 Wien https://www.josephinum.ac.at/veranstaltungen/detail/max-neuburger-lecture/ 4.6.2025 *Pamela H. Smith (Columbia):* Industryscapes: Socio-Natural Sites of Resource, Extraction and Knowledge in the Preindustrial World 17:15hrs CET, Marietta Blau Saal, Hauptgebäude der Universität Wien (Hybrid) https://scarce.univie.ac.at/events/singleview/news/industryscapes-socio-nat… 5.6.2025 Geschlecht, Körper, Diversität – aktuelle Perspektiven für Medizin, Geistes-, Rechts- und Sozialwissenschaften. Podiumsdiskussion mit Workshop zur Vernetzung und Diskussion *10:30-11:15 |PANEL I: Medication and Clinical Practices***Kolingasse 14-16, SR 7, 1090 Wien Annalena Fuchs(Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, she/her) und*Sophia Wagemann*(Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, she/her): Medicating Sex: Hormone Products, Patient Experiences, and the Science and Practice of Sex Diversity in East and West Germany, *Sophie Veigl*(Universität Wien,University of Johannesburg,she/her):Who is an Expert about Testosterone? Biomedical vs. Experiential Expertise Paneldiskussion: Geschlecht, Körper, Diversität*: Sandra Eder (Berkeley), Nick Markwald (Flensburg) und Felix Lene Ihrig (Wien)* 16:45-18:15hrs CET, Erika-Weinzierl-Saal, Hauptgebäude der Universität Wien. Im Anschluss laden wir zu einem kleinen Umtrunk. https://fakzen-thks.univie.ac.at/ueber-uns/historische-transregionale-studi… *10. Juni 2025* On the Margins of the Record: Making Sense of Gender in the Clinic *Sandra Eder,* University of California, Berkeley 11.30 bis 13.00, Seminarraum 2 Geschichte, Hauptgebäude Wir freuen uns, dass wir Sandra Eder zu einem Gastvortrag in unserer Vorlesung Kulturwissenschaftliche Forschung. Gäste Willkommen! Andrea Griesebner und Nils Güttler

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

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

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0