Philosophy of Science in Practice
№ 6!
New (Academic) Year’s Resolutions Interview: L.O.B.S.T.E.R (Limits and Objectivity of Scienti!c Foreknowledge: "e Case of Energy Outlooks) S!""#$ C%&'#$#&(# R#$%&'(
Ethical, Legal, & Social Aspects of Science and how Philosophy of Science )ts in
Also Featuring: James Griesemer From the Editor " Dear SPSPers,
As some of you will (or hopefully will not) realize this edition of our newsletter is late to arrive at your inbox. And this is almost entirely my fault. #ere is simply too much to do. As I write this (from the lobby of the PSA between sessions upstairs and a trip to the Lego store) I am struck by how easy it is to loose oneself in the seemingly endless tasks that need to be accomplished—tasks that do no more than simply keep things on track. I know this theme will be familiar to some of you. My hope is that belated or not the arrival of our beautiful newsletter will serve as a break from these tasks. May it provide an excuse to take a break, learn something new and re$ect on where SPSPer are and what we have accom- plished by ticking things o% those to-do lists. Here is some of what you will &nd inside:
' Mini History of Science lessons on the Tangent Galvanometer and Resistance Box ' Research at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology: LOBSTER—LOVE the acronym ' Academic Resolutions for Graduate Students ' Our own Sabina Leonelli discusses her star worthy ERC grant ' Philosophy of Science and Ethical, Legal and Social Apects ' #e Proust Questionnaire or All you ever wanted to know about James Griesemer ' Information about the 5th SPSP conference in Aarhus over midsummer. Organizers encourage the submission of symposia proposals!
Best Wishes, Leah
Contents #e Resistance Box " S()*+,/S-../) C0+1/)/+2/ R/(0)34 3 BSPS, Performance Philosophy, Medicine Epidemiology & Healthcare, Genetics Pedagogies Project L.O.B.S.T.E.R (KIT) on the P/S/P Question 6 (043,)564: N/7 A256/.*2 Y/5)’4 R/408-3*0+4 7 #e Epistemology of Data-Intensive Science 9 Sabina Leonelli & Leah McClimans ELSI & Philosophy of Science in Practice Sophia Efstathiou 11
James Griesemer takes our Proust Questionaire 13 SPSP 2015: !arhus 14 Is that a Philosopher or a Hipster? 15 "Contributors
Leah McClimans Sophia Efstathiou Jordan Bartol University of South Carolina Norwegian University of University of Leeds Department of Philosophy Science & Technology t Editor-at-Large, Design t t &EJUPSJO$IJFGt t &EJUPSt
Laszlo Kosolosky Mike Finn Liz Irvine Federica Russo Ghent University University of Leeds Australian Free University of Brussels Centre for Logic and Director: Museum of National University Philosophy of Science the History of Science, Technology and Medicine Signs to Symbols Project
On the Cover: Tangent Galvanometer A galvanometer is an instrument used to detect and measure electric currents. Developed in the 1820s, they were named after Luigi Galvani, the 18th – what we would now call bioelectricity – in organic bodies. At their most basic, galvanometers consist of a coil adjacent to a magnetic needle, which rests on a pivot and is free to move along a calibrated scale. When current direct proportion to the current, and this interacts with, and moves, the needle. Tangent galvanometers were an early form of this type of instrument. In these, the current is carried through a coil that winds through a non-magnetic copper pipe, encircling the device perpendicular to the ground, with the rotating needle sitting in the middle. of the compass needle, and the diffraction of the needle from the plane of the tangent of the angle between The circular metal feet below the base of the device are levelling screws, used to ensure that the plane of the coil is perpendicular to the ground. Where the stem meets the placing it at the local magnetic meridian. Many galvanometers were The copper circle at the centre of the device is a compass with a The compass must be in the direct centre of a perfectly spherical coil, The device on the cover was made by Elliott Brothers,a London based instrument maker, ca. 1890. It was design for classroom demonstration. The illustration on the left comes from a textbook from that same period. Elroy M. Avery School Physics (New York: Sheldon & Co., 1895) 525. 9
!e Resistance Box combinations, in steps of 1 ohm, any Like the galvanometer [cover], resistance from 0 to several hundred resistance boxes such as this would can be created by the box. have once formed a standard part of Controlling resistance in an electrical the set up in physics laboratories. As circuit is important, particularly a consequence, they are now very when trying to measure the current or well represented in historical science unknown resistance of another object, collections. as in a famous ‘Wheatstone Bridge’ !ese devices allowed operators to circuit. add resistance into an electrical circuit !is model, from the early 20th in speci"c, discrete amounts, by the century, was used in teaching physics removal or insertion of the various at the University of Leeds, and its well- plugs sticking out of the top. worn exterior suggests it was in use well Hidden inside the box is series of wire into the second half of the century. Over coils made of alloyed metal, wound time this ‘plug’ type of resistance box so as to produce a speci"c resistance. was replaced by instruments simpler to Each coil, hanging underneath, use, with movable dials or, eventually, drawing : Hawkins Electrical Guide spanned a gap between brass pieces digital controls. Such developments, (1917), Vol. 2, Theo Audel & Co., p.480 embedded in the top of the box. though, mean the working parts of the When a plug was inserted in the gap, instrument become even more ‘hidden’ current #owed normally; but when inside. the plug was removed, current #owed Mike Finn through the resistance coil. By di$erent ?
itself was an excellent bal- elenchus and psychoanalytic Talk of the Town ance. Biology, physics, process, where audience chemistry, economics, and members asked a volun- From national meetings to intimate medicine all received their teer questions designed to workshops, our team has the details due, as did topics in the elicit their ‘personal cos- general philosophy of sci- mology’ –an interesting BRITISH SOCIETY FOR information with the ence. #ere was also a wide process where one could see THE PHILOSOPHY OF debate on biologi- variety of approaches, from how di%erent interlocutors’ SCIENCE cal causality was well traditional metaphysics to personalities were publicly Fitzwilliam College, received, leading to a lively naturalized metaphysics, performed through Q and Cambridge opening discussion. #e from conceptual analysis A, with boundaries drawn 10-11 July day was capped by Peter to methodological analysis. so that questions were not #e 2014 British Society Clark’s presidential address, #e BSPSs policy of keep- of a personal but rather of a for the Philosophy of Science on logic, mathematics, and ing a small selective confer- philosophical nature. Danae Annual Conference brought intuition. A;er an OUP- ence with thorough abstract #eodoridou and Konstan- us to Fitzwilliam College, sponsored drinks reception, review continues to deliver tina Georgelou used post-it Cambridge, in early July. dinner, and an irresponsibly a balanced and interesting notes posted on people to #is year’s BSPS was part of late night at the Fitzwilliam programme. help us group into teams of a trio of events for the col- College pub (for some), day Jordan Bartol like-thinking participants lege. #e BSPS was followed two was quickly upon us. and re$ect on what is miss- by the 88th Joint Session Laura Ruetsche and PERFORMANCE ing from modern univer- of the Aristotelian Society Christopher Pincock took PHILOSOPHY sity education. We created and the Mind Association, to the podium for day two’s SCHOOL OF a poster and presented it to which was itself followed plenary sessions. Ruetsche ATHENS the rest of the group –our by the annual conference of addressed naturalistic in- Athens, Greece team proposing that we do the British Society for Ethi- terpretations of quantum 15-16 March pop-up Ignorance lectures, cal #eory. An impressive mechanics. Attendees of Performance Philosophy where we tell students what number of philosophers philosophy of science confer- is a community for people we know we do not know... stuck around for the Joint ences who have not brushed interested in performance In their workshop later that Session and, rumour has it, up on their interpretations of arts and philosophy and in day John Blamey and Stella a few even went for the full quantum mechanics know how philosophy can be en- Dimitrakopoulou urged triple. how di:cult these talks can gaged through performance. participants to perform Plenary sessions at the be, but Ruetsche delivered #e workshop was organ- (and think about) truth: Not BSPS are always well at- an incredibly accessible yet ised by Stefania Mylona in easier for dancers to specify tended. Paul Gri:ths set detailed and careful paper, collaboration with Michael than it is for logicians and the pace with a discussion which was followed by ques- Kliën and in association perhaps tellingly so. Mim- of genetic causation. His tions from philosophers with Performance Philoso- icking each other’s gestures, ambitious attempt to com- across sub-&elds. Likewise phy that took place at the for instance, conveyed and bine the debate on genetic Pincock’s talk on inference space of Ε.Δ.Ω. in Athens. undermined what might to the best #e workshop started o% pass for a ‘correspondence’ explanation through conversations theory of truth at the same seemed to between an analytic phi- time. #e main contribu- interest phi- losopher (Sophia Efstathiou) tions were from theater, losophers of and performance philoso- dance and performance science of all pher (Stefania Mylona). scholars though quite a few stripes, and #e workshop invited con- read papers, like Bojana was an excel- tributors who mixed per- Cvejic and Sophia Lycouris. lent capstone formance and philosophy Sophia Efstathiou instead to the meet- approaches. Michael Kliën led an Ideobics routine with ing. started o% the event with his audience members follow- #e pro- piece Personal Cosmolgies, ing her cues for a:rmative gramme a mix between a socratic exercises –the claim being
Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge that humans live by con- suming both air and ideas, and that we need exercises that combine aerobic and ideobic exercise. Owen G. Parry discussed ‘&ctional realness’ arguing that elabo- rated performances of a &ctional race or gender can be seen to perform realness through &ctional personas and practices. Finally a centerpiece of the workshop was the sculpture of George Gyparakis ‘Take a Position’, a bench constructed to make sound depending on how people sitting on it were po- sitioned and whether or not of Utah), Elselijn Kingma conference contributions Moral distress was de&ned they could reach an equilib- (University of Southamp- addressing the heritage of as the distress experienced rium position. ton), Barbara Osimani the Foucauldian notions by medical practitioners in Sophia Efstathiou (University of Camerino), biopolitics and biopower cases where they have to fol- Maël Lemoine (University in contemporary bioethics low guardians’ wishes and of Tours), Federica Russo and heath care practice. For regulation and perform (for PREDICTION IN (University of Ferrara), and instance Prof Georgios Pa- instance) an operation or EPIDEMIOLOGY & Jeremy Howick (Oxford) pagounos noted the distinc- other procedure that they HEALTHCARE presented work on topics tion between the concepts of think is the ‘wrong’ action King’s College London including: extrapolating bios and zoe, that in Greek to take. Another special 20 June from epidemiological stud- convey a di%erence between seminar organized by the ies, measuring e%ectiveness social life and physical or Research group on the Ethos Predicting what will hap- and harms, values in medi- biological life, and how the of Technology ()/4/3) at pen is a central concern in cal research, and the use of notions of bioethics and the Norwegian University epidemiology, health policy, mechanisms in research biopolitics ultimately em- of Science and Technology public health, and clinical and practice. #e workshop phasize social life issues. discussed the Ethos of Peso- practice. Predictions are con&rmed that medical pre- Conference participants nalised Medicine touching made about prognosis, about diction is of growing philo- came from central, east and on questions regarding in- the bene&ts and harms of sophical interest, intimately south European countries, formed consent, who owns interventions and other ex- connected to several active the UK and Canada. #e genomic data, designing posures, about populations, areas in the philosophy of topics discussed under the Randomised Control Tri- and about individuals. As science. perspective of bioethics and als using race/ethnicity such, the principle aim of Federica Russo biopolitics ranged. A special subpopulations, construct- the workshop was to fur- th seminar led by Prof Wendy ing infrastructures for data ther develop this important 28 EUROPEAN Austin (Alberta) and Dr handling, and ethical issues theme in the philosophy of SOCIETY FOR Daniel Garros (Stollery Chil- arising with technological science and the philosophy PHILOSOPHY dren’s Hospital) discussed mediation. Of general inter- of medicine. OF MEDICINE & the &lm Just Keep Breath- est across contributions were Jonathan Fuller (Univer- HEALTHCARE ing, which was created using issues to do end-of-life deci- sity of Toronto), Luis Flores Debrecen, Hungary Canadian Research Council sions, reproductive health (King’s College London), 27-30 Auguest funds in collaboration with issues, as well as the rights Alex Broadbent (Univer- #e conference theme was an intensive care pediatric and duties to special groups sity of Johannesburg), Ja- “Bioethics and Biopolitics” unit to enable re$ection on such as illegal immigrants cob Stegenga (University with keynote speakers and situations of moral distress. or children. Federica Russo @
NURTURING have been attempting a his- report. was given over to a roundta- GENETICS: torically and philosophically It was all killer no &ller. ble and discussion, in which REFLECTIONS ON informed experiment of #e symposium began with the practical application of A CENTURY OF their own. Dr Annie Jamie- none other than Professor philosophy to contemporary SCIENTIFIC AND son and Professor Gregory Evelyn Fox Keller on ‘From political, pedagogical, and SOCIAL CHANGE Radick, wanted to &nd out Gene Action to Reactive social problems, and the University of Leeds what would happen to biol- Genomes’. You won’t have value of studying contempo- 29 June - 2 July ogy students if you dropped to rely on me to report on rary science - as it is actually Mendel and his attractively the content of her paper, as practiced - with philosophi- simple inheritance ratios it (and a good number of the cal tools, featured medium out of the picture, and in- others presented over the to heavily. If it weren’t for Genetics - it ain’t what it stead began your module by next two days) was video the fact that I have now used to be. Nevertheless, focussing on development recorded, and will soon be reached my allocated word what it used to be remains in all its sticky and context made available online. Other limit, I would reveal all fundamentally important, dependent complexity. To speakers included Dr Chris the most important truths for biologists, historians, mark the completion of this Renwick, Dr James Tabery, that emerged from these wider society, and even that project - the results of which Dr Helen Curry, Dr Steve discussions, emphasising rare turnip, the philosopher will soon be published - they Sturdy, Professor Gholson the particular lessons for of science in practice. hosted a three day sympo- Lyon, Dr Barbara Potrata, philosophers of science in Recently researchers at sium, at which I attended, Dr Niklas Gericke and Dr Ja- practice. the University of Leeds and of which this is a brief mieson herself. #e last day Dominic Berry
Performance Philosophy Emulating the Quacker Circles of Friends A
Philosophy of Science, in Practice or Philosophy of Science-in-Practice? INTERVIEW: L.O.B.S.T.E.R. Can you give us a (Limits and Objectivity of brief description of the LOBSTER group? #e LOBSTER group was founded four years ago Laszlo Kosolosky at KIT with the original mission – re$ected in its acronym – to assess ethical and methodological !e Society for Philosophy of Science in Practice is aspects of energy scenarios. Yet, it was clear from interested in philosophy of science from a practical the beginning that we are not just interested in perspective. Following John Dupré’s presentation at energy scenarios but rather want to investigate our conference in Exeter (June 22-24, 2011), the study of more general problems at the interface of science science in practice tends to make two assumptions, i.e. and society, which also arise in energy policy making but are clearly not restricted to it. Broadly (1) philosophy of science should be connected to science, speaking, we are trying to better understand (a) and (2) there is more to science than published texts, how to assess and articulate various scienti%c i.e. practice. Nonetheless, as John discussed there are uncertainties in a policy-relevant way and (b) how at least two distinct ways to study science in practice: to rationally deliberate and argue about policy philosophy-of-science in practice and philosophy of options in the face of severe uncertainty and ignorance. science-in-practice. While these are the questions which tie the We invited the LOBSTER (Limits and Objectiv- group together, there are various further topics we ity of Scienti&c Foreknowledge: #e Case of Ener- discuss on a regular basis: So, argument mapping gy Outlooks), group at the Karlsruhe Institute of (cf. www.argunet.org) and argumentation theory Technology (KIT, Karlsruhe`, Germany) to share is something we’re pursuing very actively and for quite some time now, Christian Voigt especially their thoughts. is pushing this (we’re currently planning to establish a joint Lab with computer scientists on Argumentation Studies and Technologies); Basti Cacean and Gregor Betz are doing formal work in social and veritistic epistemology, including computer simulations; Anna Leuschner carries out and contributes detailed case studies on pluralism and values in science.
How does your work, as a group, !t in the distinction between pos-p v p-osp? It seems to us that we are both doing Philosophy- of-Science in Practice (applied methodology) and Philosophy of Science-in-Practice (e.g. applied social epistemology and applied ethics of science and technology). To give an example of pos-p: We’re part of a graduate school on energy scenarios, where we mostly engage with scientists who construct and employ energy models. (And one LOBSTER- member, Monika Culka, is a former energy modeler.) Here, we try to improve the science of energy system modeling and the corresponding policy advice by introducing (fairly basic) insights or conceptual distinctions from philosophy of science; e.g. on the interpretation of probability B
statements, on the methodology of possibilistic What are your opinions, prediction, or on argument analysis. as a group, about the Another example for a pos-p project is our distinction itself? engagement in a large interdisciplinary project It seems to us that the distinction is sensible on the German “Energiewende”. Christian and refers to di&erent philosophical questions. Dieckho& is participating in the development of However, we’d like to point out that you can a scheme to evaluate energy scenarios in terms (and should) do both pos-p and p-osp in close of methodological soundness (e.g. appropriate collaboration with scientists and scienti%c uncertainty treatment) and political usefulness policy-advisors who struggle with and solve (e.g. appropriate communication of uncertainties). methodological and structural problems in Our experience is that applied philosophy-of- science (and at its interface with policy-making) science can really make a di&erence and is typically all the time. highly valued (especially by young scientists). In addition, pos-p can and should inform As to p-osp, we’re thinking about how assessment p-osp. A clear understanding of the methods reports for scienti%c policy advice should be and limits of a particular discipline or research written – and about the role scientists should play %eld (pos-p) must inform an assessment of the in this context. role the corresponding experts (should) play in As a matter of fact, we have quite a controversy a democratic society. Or, in other words, applied about these questions, especially about the social epistemology needs to be informed by notorious “value free ideal”, even within our applied methodology. In the same time, and the small group. Another p-osp project, conducted by other way around, p-osp can help pos-p to identify Frederike Neuber, assesses the moral controversy societally signi%cant methodological issues which about developing and implementing climate are worth investigating. engineering technologies.
known as Parkinson’s law and is Graduate Students, Speak Out! thought by many to apply to all New (academic) manner of labor. Our work seems to demand so much of our time be- cause we give so much of our time Jordan Bartol to it. Giving less time to the same body of work tends to shrink the !e air is cooling, the days are getting shorter, body of work, meaning we get the same tasks done and the campus is abuzz with parents ‘helping’ sooner, because their scope shrinks. Work less, embarrassed 18-year-olds sign in at their dorms, get more done. pay their fees, and "nd the nearest IKEA. !is If increasing productivity is not enough moti- can only mean one thing: It’s a new academic year. vation, how about improving your health? Over- Whether it’s your "rst year as a graduate student work has disastrous health e%ects, as document or your "#h, it’s time for some resolutions. New in a recent WHO report
otherwise identify with their own success or abili- gears every once and awhile will be bene&cial. ties. Impostor syndrome is widespread among ac- Non-academic passions can also help get ademics and can be psychologically devastating. through those times when you lose interest in Key to imposter syndrome is the maintenance your academic work, or when there is an unex- of a feeling of inadequacy in the face of evidence pected break in your academic work. to the contrary. #e PhD programme to which you were admitted? #ey made a mistake, fooled 4) Check out a new area of philosophy or his- by your application. #at paper you published? tory or whatever it is that you do. What do you #e referees were lazy. #e conference you at- know about aesthetics, or medieval philosophy, tended? Your supervisor got you in. #e respect or ethics, or critical theory, or #omistic philoso- of your peers? If they only knew! #ey are blind phy? #ere might be something interesting there. to your inadequacy. You’ll have covered a lot of ground during your #e anxiety that comes from feelings of inad- undergrad. Perhaps you were a wunderkind, equacy is compounded by a fear of being found and still remember all that you learned in your out. Eventually your supervisors, friends, and survey courses. Even still, there will be areas of colleagues will realize that you do not belong. philosophy that you did not cover, areas that you To those unfamiliar with the problem, it is deliberately avoided, or areas that you covered tempting to believe that simply recognizing the only super&cially. As you’ll now know, what hap- existence of impostor syndrome is su:cient to pens in contemporary philosophy looks very little treat it. But things are not so simple. Impostor like what we teach to undergraduates. So go see syndrome can also be cognitively impenetrable. what’s up. Knowing that graduate students are disposed to Engaging in new areas is easier than you think. impostor syndrome does not necessarily help. Blogs are a great start, but workshops are even Su%ers know that many others feel like impostors, better. #ere is no rule that says you must be an but believe that they are the only ones who are expert to attend an academic event. Be an aca- truly frauds. It is not easy to change beliefs about demic tourist! Philosophy of science in practice one’s self. is not the only group of friendly academics. Most Various forms of therapy and peer support are sub-disciplines are welcoming. You do not need e%ective techniques. Ultimately, the su%erer must to switch &elds (you probably shouldn’t) you just come to internalize their own success and believe need to see some talks and get a feel for what hap- in their own abilities. #is is not easy, but it is pens on the other sides of the fence. Worst case immensely important. scenario: You’ll realize that other disciplines are not for you, re-a:rming your commitment to 3) Get passionate about something else – any- whatever it is you currently do. Best case scenar- thing else. Many graduate students give up their io: you meet some new academics, pick up some hobbies during graduate school, believing this new tools, and expand your horizons. will free them up to work longer and work harder. #at’s probably not true (see 1). It’s also probably 5) Plan some travel. Nothing helps you get a bad idea. through the academic year like light at the end of Perhaps the belief is that one’s hobbies will the tunnel. #ey say that Scandinavia is a wonder- re-emerge a;er graduate school. If so, grads are ful place to holiday. Try Denmark; in June. How probably not paying attention to the workloads of about Aarhus? While you’re there, why not check their supervisors. If you do not have time for your out the Society for the Philosophy in Practice meet- hobbies while writing a thesis, you will not have ing – 24-26 June. If you’re attending the meeting, time for them when saddled with the burdens of you might as well submit a paper – in between an academic job. your hobbies, therapy, and horizon-expanding. If your hobby is physical activity, there is evi- dence that the hormone rush will do wonders for your creativity and focus. If your hobby is more artistic, there is evidence that the change in brain activity will bene&t your work in the long-run. Whatever it is that you like to do, shi;ing neural D