Call for Papers
*Second Biennial Conference of the Society for Philosophy of Science in 
Practice (SPSP)*
University of Minnesota, 18-20 June 2009

Please send an abstract of 500 words, and full contact information, to 
[log in to unmask]
For further information about the conference, see the conference 
website: http://ships.umn.edu/spsp

*Deadline for submission: February 1st, 2009.*

The Society for Philosophy of Science in Practice (SPSP) aims to create 
an interdisciplinary community of scholars who approach the philosophy 
of science with a focus on scientific practice and the practical uses of 
scientific knowledge. For further details on our objectives and 
activities, see the Society's website:

http://www.philosophy-science-practice.org


The SPSP biennial conferences provide a broad forum for scholars 
committed to making detailed and systematic studies of scientific 
practices — neither dismissing concerns about truth and rationality, nor 
ignoring contextual and pragmatic factors. The conferences aim at 
cutting through traditional disciplinary barriers and developing novel 
approaches. We welcome contributions from not only philosophers of 
science, but also philosophers working in epistemology and ethics, as 
well as the philosophy of engineering, medicine, agriculture, and other 
practical fields. Additionally, we welcome contributions from historians 
and sociologists of science, pure and applied scientists, and any others 
with an interest in philosophical questions regarding scientific practice.

The SPSP Conference in 2009 will be held concurrently with a large 
workshop for teachers on integrating historical, philosophical and 
sociological perspectives into science teaching 
(http://ships.umn.edu/2009). Joint sessions are planned.

In addition to keynote lectures by Prof. Helen Longino (Stanford 
University) and Prof. Mary Morgan (London School of Economics), the 
conference will feature parallel sessions with contributed papers. For 
the 2009 conference, we particularly welcome contributions on the topics 
listed below; however, other topics are by no means excluded. Please 
indicate clearly in your abstract which of the following topics (if any) 
your paper addresses — this will help us construct coherent themed 
sessions.

In addition to individual papers, proposals for whole, thematic sessions 
with coordinated papers are strongly encouraged, particularly those 
which include multiple disciplinary perspectives and/or input from 
scientific practitioners. Session proposals must include a 500-word 
abstract for each paper (or an equivalent amount of depth and detail, if 
the format of the proposed session is a less traditional one). Multiple 
submissions of any form by the same person will not be allowed.

1. Philosophy of Science and Science Education: How does philosophy of 
science inform science teaching? What ideas about scientific practice, 
including those based on historical and sociological perspectives, are 
important to teach? How can they be effectively taught in a science 
classroom? How is such understanding assessed? What insights and 
challenges might such contexts offer to philosophers?

2. Epistemology of Scientific Practice: There has been a degree of 
disconnection between epistemology and the philosophy of science, 
despite the clear relevance of the two fields to each other. We welcome 
contributions that flesh out epistemologists’ concerns in terms of 
scientific practice, or broaden traditional epistemological categories 
in order to make them more suitable for the understanding of knowledge 
practices.

3. Experimental Practices: More than 20 years ago the ‘new 
experimentalists’ in philosophy of science called for a more serious 
engagement with experimental practice. The work continues, and 
significant questions remain. How are scientific phenomena produced and 
observed — in the laboratory, in the observatory, in the field, and even 
in the armchair? What exactly does the knowledge of phenomena consist 
in? What are the characteristics of the technologies and sites that 
enable scientists to identify the objects of their study and to theorize 
about them?

4. Practices of Modeling, Simulations and Computer Experiments: Anyone 
familiar with today’s cutting-edge scientific research will feel how out 
of touch our common philosophical images of scientific activity are. 
Most scientific theorizing today seems to happen in the form of modeling 
and simulation. Has there now been enough philosophical work on 
modeling, after the flurry of activity in recent decades? Have we, for 
instance, paid enough attention to the more applied and complex subjects 
that tend to be neglected in traditional philosophy of science, 
including climatology, synthetic chemistry, ecology and seismology?

5. ‘Knowing Well’, Values, and Evidence-for-Use: How do philosophical 
approaches to knowledge change when the context shifts from ‘pure’ 
science to applied science and public policy, in areas such as 
engineering, agriculture and medicine? How do we go beyond mere knowing 
to ‘knowing well’? How does the blurring of the traditional distinction 
between ‘fact’ and ‘value’ affect our conceptions of evidence and 
epistemic justification? And how do individual and social values and 
sense of responsibility shape the scope, focus and methods of scientific 
practice?

6. Rationality, Pluralism and ‘Styles of Reasoning’: Philosophers tend 
to accept very few kinds of reasoning as rational: deductive, 
inductive/statistical, and perhaps abductive. From historical and 
empirical studies it appears that scientific practices employ many other 
styles of reasoning. Often, these other ‘styles’ are seen as ‘merely 
heuristic’ and unable to play a role in the justification of knowledge. 
Is it possible to present more interesting accounts of these other 
styles of reasoning and of rationality?

7. Philosophical Pragmatism and Science in Practice: Are there existing 
philosophical frameworks that are particularly well-suited for the 
understanding of ‘science in practice’? In recent years many people have 
paid renewed attention to the American pragmatists in this connection: 
Dewey, Peirce, James, and also C. I. Lewis. Can pragmatism really 
provide useful guidance for the philosophy of science in practice? If 
so, which ideas are most useful for which purposes?

8. Social Epistemology: Within both the philosophy and sociology of 
science, there is a shared interest in the production, assessment, and 
validation of knowledge. We welcome contributions which synthesize 
sociological and philosophical points of view — empirically based 
research into the origination and transmission of scientific knowledge, 
as well as considerations about the social issues which arise when such 
knowledge is applied in a variety of types of practice.

(For any queries, please contact Hasok Chang <[log in to unmask]>.)