Philosophy of technology has developed through a plurality of traditions that reflect on techné\;\, technics\, technological change\, and the role of technology in shaping knowledge\, human being and social praxis and relations. Artificial Intelligence has recently become one of the most prominent technological developments engaging these traditions. Rather than constituting an entirely new philosophical field\, AI enters an already rich landscape of techno-philosophical thought.
\nThe conference \;Philosophy of Technology and AI: Traditions\, Transitions\, and Tensions \;invites contributions that approach Artificial Intelligence from within the philosophy of technology and reflect on how AI reopens fundamental questions of technics and technology across different traditions\, conceptual transitions\, and philosophical tensions. \;
\nThe title highlights three interconnected dimensions of this encounter:
\nTraditions \;refer to the diverse schools and lineages within the philosophy of technology that provide conceptual frameworks for interpreting technological developments. These traditions often crystallize around influential authors\, methodological approaches\, or intellectual constellations within particular philosophical or regional contexts. Whether emerging from phenomenological\, ontological\, critical\, feminist\, media-philosophical\, pragmatist\, or science and technology studies approaches\, they offer distinct ways of understanding technology.
\nTransitions \;refer to the conceptual and technological shifts associated with AI. Developments such as machine learning\, generative models\, and large-scale computational infrastructures invite reconsideration of established techno-philosophical concepts and raise questions about how existing philosophical frameworks respond to new technological configurations.
\nTensions \;refer to the conceptual\, methodological\, and normative disagreements that arise within the philosophy of technology when interpreting AI. Within the philosophy of technology\, AI intersects with diverse philosophical problem horizons\, including ontological questions of technics and being\, theories of human&ndash\;technology relations\, reflections on human activity\, labor\, and automation as well as approaches that situate technics within broader ecological\, natural\, or systemic contexts. These differing conceptual starting points shape how AI is interpreted and debated.
\nThe conference aims to bring these techno-philosophical perspectives into dialogue and to explore how AI can be interpreted within\, across\, and between traditions of the philosophy of technology.
\n\; \;
\nPossible topics include\, but are not limited to:
\n&bull\; Re-readings of AI through key figures of the philosophy of technology and technics \;
\n&bull\; Underrepresented traditions and voices in the philosophy of technology and their potential to reframe philosophical interpretations of AI
\n&bull\; Notions of technics and/or technology in light of AI
\n&bull\; Continuities and discontinuities between AI and earlier technics and technologies
\n&bull\; AI and human&ndash\;technics relations \;
\n&bull\; The status of AI: object\, tool\, milieu\, agent\, infrastructure\, partner?
\n&bull\; Ontological questions and AI
\n&bull\; Phenomenological perspectives on living and acting with AI
\n&bull\; Epistemological shifts
\nKeynote speakers \;
\nDavid Gunkel (confirmed)
\nToni Loh (invited)
\nConference details
\nDate: \;4&ndash\;6 November 2026
Format: \;2.5-day conference (Wednesday and Thursday full days\, Friday until midday)
Venue:
The IMPULSE-House
University of Bonn
Submission guidelines
\nPlease submit an abstract of \;300&ndash\;500 words \;together with a short CV (max. 150 words).
\nSubmissions should be sent as \;one PDF file titled &ldquo\;Abstract-Submission TTT.&rdquo\;
\nDeadline for submissions: \;30 April
Notification of acceptance: \;by 1 June
Submissions and inquiries can be sent to:
jurgita.imbrasaite@uni-bonn.de
The Student Conference Logic and Metaphysics I. Metaphysics of Logic will take place from 07.08.26. to 08.08.26 \; at the University of Bonn.
\nKeynote speakers: Elke Brendel (confirmed)\, Gillian Russel (confirmed)\, tba.
\nTopic
\nWhat is the relationship between logical laws and rational thinking? Are there facts about logic that are independent of us\, and if so\, what is their metaphysical status? Do purely logical statements have meaning? Is there a true logical system\, or can several logical systems be accepted at once? What is the relationship between classical logic and alternative logics?
\nGiven the central role that logic plays in contemporary philosophy\, the importance of these questions cannot be underestimated. In analytical philosophy in particular\, it is often assumed that logical formalization can lend arguments a special power. This power makes it seemingly impossible to accept the premises of an argument and yet reject its conclusion. Arguments that cannot be formalized in this way\, on the other hand\, are often rejected as &lsquo\;unscientific.&rsquo\;
\nBut as central as logic is to analytical philosophy\, philosophers disagree about its nature and foundations. This great diversity of positions in the philosophy of logic has a long tradition: Frege believed that the principles of logic were general laws of truth and that rules for correct judgment could be derived from them. (Der Gedanke\, 58) Carnap's famous postulate &ldquo\;In logic there are no morals&rdquo\; (The Logical Syntax of Language §\;17) expresses the idea that logical systems can only claim validity relative to the specification of a particular language. Jared Warren believes that logical truths are a shadow of syntax or reflections on linguistic rules. (Shadows of Syntax\, p. 325\; Slogan 8)
\nThe aim of the conference is to facilitate the exchange of different positions on the mentioned issues. Both systematic contributions to current debates and discussions of historical positions are welcome.
\nDetails
\nWe encourage BA\, MA\, and M.Ed. students to submit abstracts on the above topic in English. Submissions should include a brief description of the topic (approximately two to three sentences) and an abstract of no more than 400 words for a blind review. Each presenter will have 45 minutes for their presentation\, 20 minutes for the talk\, and 25 minutes for a Q&\;A. \;
\nThe deadline for submissions is 30.04.26. Please submit your application as a PDF to logicandmetaphysics@protonmail.com. Documents need to be anonymized for blind review. Please make sure to use &ldquo\;Abstract Metaphysics of Logic Bonn 2026&rdquo\; as the subject of the Email.
\nWe particularly encourage students from underrepresented and marginalized groups to submit abstracts in order to support diversity and equality at universities. \;
\nAll submissions will undergo a blind review. All applicants will be notified by email by 18.05.26. regardless of whether their presentation has been selected. We will contact you for further organizational steps if your presentation is selected.
\nWe are working on financing the conference\, however currently we cannot guarantee a full (or even a partial) reimbursement of travel and accommodation costs. Should you be unable to finance your accommodation\, please indicate this in your email. A limited number of participants can be accommodated by the local student body.
\nYou can find more information on the conference website: https://sites.google.com/view/logic-and-metaphysics/home
\nor on our philevents page: https://philevents.org/event/show/144350 \;
\nIf you have any questions\, please contact the organizers: logicandmetaphysics@protonmail.com.
\nWe look forward to receiving your abstracts!
\n ORGANIZER;CN=Madara Vaserberga;CN=Leon Isenmann;CN=Timo Selting;CN=Dalon Axhimusa;CN=Marvin Thinschmidt: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260415T204307Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20260506T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20260507T170000 SUMMARY:Neuroethics in Transition: Challenges and Opportunities for Research\, Politics\, and Society UID:20260418T032300Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-f5d4878dd-x5n6c TZID:Europe/Berlin LOCATION:Adenauerallee 131\, Bonn\, Germany\, 53113 DESCRIPTION:Organizer: \;Research Hub Neuroethics (RHUNE)
\nLanguage: \;German or English
\nKeynotes: \;Prof. Dr. Surjo Soekadar &\; Prof. Dr. Birgit Beck
\nDate: 05/06 9-14\, 05/07 9-17
ORGANIZER;CN=Bert Heinrichs;CN=Jan-Hendrik Heinrichs;CN=Orsolya Friedrich;CN=Philipp Kellmeyer: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260415T204307Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20260807T093000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20260808T170000 SUMMARY:Metaphysics of Logic UID:20260418T032301Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-f5d4878dd-x5n6c TZID:Europe/Berlin LOCATION:Regina-Pacis-Weg 3\, Bonn\, Germany\, 53113 DESCRIPTION:What is the relationship between logical laws and rational thinking? Are there facts about logic that are independent of us\, and if so\, what is their metaphysical status? Do purely logical statements have meaning? Is there a true logical system\, or can several logical systems be accepted at once? What is the relationship between classical logic and alternative logics?
\nGiven the central role that logic plays in contemporary philosophy\, the importance of these questions cannot be underestimated. In analytical philosophy in particular\, it is often assumed that logical formalization can lend arguments a special power. This power makes it seemingly impossible to accept the premises of an argument and yet reject its conclusion. Arguments that cannot be formalized in this way\, on the other hand\, are often rejected as &lsquo\;unscientific.&rsquo\;
\nBut as central as logic is to analytical philosophy\, philosophers disagree about its nature and foundations. This great diversity of positions in the philosophy of logic has a long tradition: Frege believed that the principles of logic were general laws of truth and that rules for correct judgment could be derived from them. (Der Gedanke\, 58) Carnap's famous postulate &ldquo\;In logic there are no morals&rdquo\; (The Logical Syntax of Language §\;17) expresses the idea that logical systems can only claim validity relative to the specification of a particular language. Jared Warren believes that logical truths are a shadow of syntax or reflections on linguistic rules. (Shadows of Syntax\, p. 325\; Slogan 8)
\nThe aim of the conference is to facilitate the exchange of different positions on the mentioned issues. Both systematic contributions to current debates and discussions of historical positions are welcome.
\nCall for abstracts
\nWe encourage BA\, MA\, and M.Ed. students to submit abstracts on the above topic in English. Submissions should include a brief description of the topic (approximately two to three sentences) and an abstract of no more than 400 words for a blind review. Each presenter will have 45 minutes for their presentation\, 20 minutes for the talk\, and 25 minutes for a Q&\;A. \;
\nThe deadline for submissions is 30.04.26.. Please submit your application as a PDF to logicandmetaphysics@protonmail.com. Documents need to be anonymized for blind review. Please make sure to use &ldquo\;Abstract Metaphysics of Logic Bonn 2026&rdquo\; \;as the subject of the Email.
\nWe particularly encourage students from underrepresented and marginalized groups to submit abstracts in order to support diversity and equality at universities. \;
\nAll submissions will undergo a blind review. All applicants will be notified by email by 18.05.26. regardless of whether their presentation has been selected. We will contact you for further organizational steps if your presentation is selected.
\nWe are working on financing the conference\, however currently we cannot guarantee a full (or even a partial) reimbursement of travel and accommodation costs. Should you be unable to finance your accommodation\, please indicate this in your email. A limited number of participants can be accommodated by the local student body.
\nIf you have any questions\, please contact the organizers logicandmetaphysics@protonmail.com. We look forward to receiving your abstracts!
ORGANIZER;CN=Madara Vaserberga;CN=Leon Isenmann;CN=Timo Selting;CN=Dalon Axhimusa;CN=Marvin Thinschmidt: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260415T204307Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261104T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261106T170000 SUMMARY:Philosophy of Technology and AI: Traditions\, Transitions\, and Tensions UID:20260418T032302Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-f5d4878dd-x5n6c TZID:Europe/Berlin LOCATION:Adenauerallee 131\, Bonn\, Germany\, 53113 DESCRIPTION:The conference aims to bring techno-philosophical perspectives into dialogue and to explore how AI can be interpreted within\, across\, and between traditions of the philosophy of technology.
\nThe title highlights three interconnected dimensions of this encounter:
\nTraditions refer to the diverse schools and lineages within the philosophy of technology that provide conceptual frameworks for interpreting technological developments. These traditions often crystallize around influential authors\, methodological approaches\, or intellectual constellations within particular philosophical or regional contexts. Whether emerging from phenomenological\, ontological\, critical\, feminist\, media-philosophical\, pragmatist\, or science and technology studies approaches\, they offer distinct ways of understanding technology.
\nTransitions refer to the conceptual and technological shifts associated with AI. Developments such as machine learning\, generative models\, and large-scale computational infrastructures invite reconsideration of established techno-philosophical concepts and raise questions about how existing philosophical frameworks respond to new technological configurations.
\nTensions refer to the conceptual\, methodological\, and normative disagreements that arise within the philosophy of technology when interpreting AI. Within the philosophy of technology\, AI intersects with diverse philosophical problem horizons\, including ontological questions of technics and being\, theories of human&ndash\;technology relations\, reflections on human activity\, labor\, and automation as well as approaches that situate technics within broader ecological\, natural\, or systemic contexts. These differing conceptual starting points shape how AI is interpreted and debated.
ORGANIZER;CN=Jurgita Imbrasaite: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR