Additional new publications by EENPS members

[EENPS (Borut Trpin)]

Dear EENPS members,

It’s a pleasure to share two more new publications by our members — both from Milena Ivanova.

See https://eenps.weebly.com/members-publications.html and also below.

Best wishes,

Borut Trpin (coordinator of the EENPS)

--

twitter tag: @milena_ivanova_

Author: Milena Ivanova (University of Cambridge)

2021. Duhem and Holism. Cambridge Elements: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009004657]

Abstract 

The holistic thesis developed by Pierre Duhem challenges the idea that our evidence can conclusively falsify a theory. Given that no scientific theory is tested in isolation, a negative experiment can always be attributed to components other than the theory we test – to the auxiliary hypotheses and background assumptions. How do scientists decide whether the experimental result undermines the theory or points at an error in the underlying assumptions? Duhem argues that we cannot offer a rule that directs when the scientist should employ a radical or conservative strategy in light of a negative result, and ultimately they will appeal to their intuition. More recently philosophers have offered a number of strategies of how to locate error and justify the abandonment of a theory or an auxiliary hypothesis. This Element analyses Duhem's response to holism and subsequent accounts of how the problem can be resolved. 

2021. The Aesthetics of Scientific Experiments. Philosophy Compass.  [https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12730]

Abstract

This article explores the aesthetic dimensions of scientific experimentation, addressing specifically how aesthetic features enter the construction, evaluation and reception of an experiment. I highlight the relationship between experiments and artistic acts in the early years of the Royal Society where experiments do not serve only epistemic aims but also aim to generate feelings of awe and pleasure. I turn to analysing which aspects of experiments are appreciated aesthetically, identifying several contenders, from the ability of an experiment to uncover nature's beauty, to encapsulating original designs and human creativity. Following this analysis, I focus on the notion of beauty: what makes an experiment beautiful? Several common qualities are explored, from the simplicity and economy of the experiment, to the significance of the experimental results.

[EENPS (Borut Trpin)]

Dear EENPS members,

It’s a pleasure to share two new publications by our steering committee member Daniel Kostić.

See https://eenps.weebly.com/members-publications.html and also below.

Let me also use this opportunity to wish all members of the EENPS happy holidays and a happy new year — hopefully many of us get to meet at our upcoming conference in Tartu, Estonia in August (more info coming soon).

Best wishes,

Borut Trpin (coordinator of the EENPS)

—

Daniel Kostić (Radboud University, The Netherlands).

“Topological Explanations, an Opinionated Appraisal.” In Lawler, I., Shech, E. and Khalifa, K. (eds): Scientific Understanding and Representation: Mathematical Modeling in the Life and Physical Sciences, Routledge.

Abstract:

In this chapter I provide a systematic overview of topological explanations in the philosophy of science literature. I do so by presenting an account of topological explanation that I have developed in other publications and then comparing this account to other accounts of topological explanation. Finally, this appraisal is opinionated because it highlights some problems in alternative accounts of topological explanations, and also it outlines responses to some of the main criticisms raised by the so-called new mechanists.

 

Daniel Kostić (Radboud University, The Netherlands) and Kareem Khalifa (Middlebury College, USA.).

"The directionality of topological explanations”. Synthese. 

Abstract:

Proponents of ontic conceptions of explanation require all explanations to be backed by causal, constitutive, or similar relations. Among their justifications is that only ontic conceptions can do justice to the ‘directionality’ of explanation, i.e., the requirement that if X explains Y, then not-Y does not explain not-X. Using topological explanations as an illustration, we argue that non-ontic conceptions of explanation have ample resources for securing the directionality of explanations. The different ways in which neuroscientists rely on multiplexes involving both functional and anatomical connectivity in their topological explanations vividly illustrate why ontic considerations are frequently (if not always) irrelevant to explanatory directionality. Therefore, directionality poses no problem to non-ontic conceptions of explanation.

Link: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03414-y

Twitter handle: @DanielKostic

[EENPS (Borut Trpin)]

Dear EENPS members,

To follow up on yesterday’s email, I’m also happy to share the news of a book recently published (publication year 2022) by our member Marek Pokropski.

See https://eenps.weebly.com/members-publications.html and also below.

Best wishes,

Borut Trpin (coordinator of the EENPS)

-

-

Marek Pokropski (Faculty of Philosophy, University of Warsaw, Poland).
Mechanisms and Consciousness. Integrating Phenomenology with Cognitive Science, Routledge.
Abstract:
This book develops a new approach to naturalizing phenomenology. The author proposes to integrate phenomenology with the mechanistic framework for explanation in cognitive sciences, and offers new methodological perspectives for studying complex mental phenomena such as consciousness.
Link:
https://www.routledge.com/Mechanisms-and-Consciousness-Integrating-Phenomenology-with-Cognitive-Science/Pokropski/p/book/9780367465254#

[EENPS (Borut Trpin)]

Dear EENPS members,

It’s a pleasure for me to share a new publication by our member. 

See https://eenps.weebly.com/members-publications.html and also below.

Best wishes,

Borut Trpin (coordinator of the EENPS)

--

twitter tag: @milena_ivanova_

Milena Ivanova (University of Cambridge).

“What is a Beautiful Experiment?” Erkenntnis.

Abstract:

This article starts an engagement on the aesthetics of experiments and offers an account for analysing how aesthetics features in the design, evaluation and reception of experiments. I identify two dimensions of aesthetic evaluation of experiments: design and significance. When it comes to design, a number of qualities, such as simplicity, economy and aptness, are analysed and illustrated with the famous Meselson-Stahl experiment. Beautiful experiments are also regarded to make significant discoveries, but I argue against a narrow construal of experimental aims. By drawing on the plurality of goals experimenters have and diversity of aesthetic responses, I argue that experiments are aesthetically appreciated both when they discover and when they produce disruptive results.

URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10670-021-00509-3