Computational methods and simulations have become a fruitful methodology for philosophers\, particularly for understanding how social relations\, norms\, and communicative structures could and should shape inquiry. Work in computational social philosophy has illuminated phenomena ranging from the epistemic value of diversity and the dynamics of epistemic belonging to the emergence and erosion of norms and processes of polarization.
\nGenerative and agentic AI tools stand to profoundly reshape computational social philosophy in at least two ways:
\nAs objects of study for computational social philosophy. Generative and agentic AI are increasingly embedded in epistemic life: as sources of information\, interlocutors\, surrogates for social participants\, gatekeepers within epistemic communities\, and even partially autonomous epistemic actors. This should motivate a broadening of purview in social epistemology\, which has tended to focus primarily on personal\, interpersonal\, and institutional factors that impact inquiry\, but comparatively less on technological factors. \;
\nAs tools of study for computational social philosophy. These systems can lower the technical barriers to computational work. More interestingly\, they may expand the range of social phenomena philosophers can model\, including richer representations of agents&rsquo\; beliefs and behavior\, more complex interactions and environments\, and even digital-twin-style models of particular communities or institutions.
\nThis cluster brings together philosophers working in\, or seriously engaging with\, computational social philosophy. We are eager to gather a cohort who can bring rigor\, clarity\, and intellectual generosity to advancing understanding in relation to the above themes.
\nWe&rsquo\;re particularly interested in philosophical contributions that engage one or more of the following cross-cutting threads:
\nModeling of AI systems as socio-epistemic phenomena: How might explicitly modeling the effects of AI systems within social epistemic processes challenge\, deepen\, or expand existing understanding in social epistemology and philosophy of science?
\nModeling of socio-epistemic phenomena with AI-based tools: What new forms of social epistemological phenomena can AI-based tools help us represent and investigate beyond traditional methods\, such as typical agent-based models?
\nUnderstanding aims and tradeoffs: How should we think about the tradeoffs between promises of AI-based tools (e.g.\, flexibility\, expressive power\, scale) and other desiderata (e.g.\, robustness\, justification\, tractability\, understanding) that have long been central to computational social philosophy? What can we learn about these issues from the use of AI-based tools in other disciplines such as computational social science?
\nMethodological standards: What standards should guide reliable\, reproducible\, and more generally epistemically and ethically responsible philosophical inquiry using AI-based methods in computational social philosophy?
\nPlease note that\, while we welcome expressions of interest from all disciplines\, this is not a general workshop about AI or AI-based simulations. It is a workshop about how deeper engagement with AI systems as objects of modeling studies and as a modeling tool can ultimately enrich and expand philosophical inquiry.
\nFormat
\nThe series will consist of bi-weekly virtual meetings\, in the style of CSPS\, starting in October 2026.The meetings are on Mondays at 11:30am ET.
\nApplications
\nYou can submit your application to join the seminars by using this application form: https://forms.gle/SC2iqbZUBU6iB52v6 \;
\nThe application form includes:
\nBasic details: Your name\, email address\, affiliation\, career stage
\nExtended abstracts of up to 750 words and prepared for anonymous review (no identifying information in the abstract itself).
\nThe submission deadline for applications is July 27th\, 2026.
\nOrganizers
\nSina Fazelpour (Northeastern)
\nLuca Garzino Demo (UPenn) \;
\nPlease direct inquiries to lgarzino@sas.upenn.edu
ORGANIZER;CN=Sina Fazelpour;CN=Luca Garzino Demo: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Madrid:20261007T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Madrid:20261009T170000 SUMMARY:Causality and Causal Inference in Medicine UID:20260930T143403Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:Europe/Madrid LOCATION:Facultad de Filosofia\, C/Camilo José Cela S/N\, Sevilla\, Spain\, 41018 DESCRIPTION:Interactions between the philosophy of causality and investigations of inferential practices in the sciences\, particularly medicine\, have yielded key developments across disciplines. One such example is evidential pluralism\, arguing for broadening the evidence range beyond difference-making to overcome the rigidity of evidence-based medicine. Further interdisciplinary engagements can assess the adequacy of different philosophical analyses of causation and corresponding causal concepts with respect to particular scientific problems or areas or draw on practices from the sciences to adjust the philosophical toolkit. At the same time\, there are also challenges to address\, such as working across areas with different\, sometimes conflicting\, methods and approaches. This conference aims to bring together current research dealing with causality and inferential practices in the health sciences\, broadly construed\, welcoming philosophical\, methodological\, and scientific contributions\, among others.
\nKeynote speakers:
\nJonathan Fuller (University of Pittsburgh)
\nNaja Hulvej Rod (University of Copenhagen)
\nSaana Jukola (University of Twente)
\nLocal organizing team: Cristina Baré\;s Gó\;mez\, Matthieu Fontaine\, Elena Popa\, Quentin Ruyant.
This conference is the 16th in the series of Causality in the Sciences conferences. Steering committee: Phyllis Illari\, Science &\; Technology Studies\, UCL\; Samantha Kleinberg\, Computer Science\, Stevens\; Bert Leuridan\, Philosophy\, Antwerp\; Julian Reiss: Philosophy\, Linz\; Federica Russo: History and Philosophy of Science\, Utrecht\; Erik Weber: Philosophy\, Ghent\; Jon Williamson: Philosophy\, Manchester. \; \;
Funding and organization
History and Philosophy of Science (HPS) has been a vibrant movement in the philosophy of science since 1960s. It profoundly influenced the development of 20th century philosophy of science. HPS departments and postgraduate programmes have been established worldwide\, while various HPS conferences have been running regularly. However\, HPS in the East is still underdeveloped. To be fair\, philosophy of science in East Asia is not as well developed as it might seem. For example\, in China\, philosophy of science is even sometimes conflated with analytic philosophy. This workshop series aims to advance and promote the research of HPS in the East. It will bring together philosophers of science and historians of science in the East to promote the dialogue across the boundaries with an aim to reflect on the nature\, methodology\, and development of HPS and explore new HPS approaches.
\nVenue
\nDates
\nOrganising Committee
\nKeynote Speakers
\nContact
\nRADIATION: Connection Across Distance
\nA Cross-disciplinary Conference
\nArnolfini\, Bristol\, UK 12 &ndash\; 14 Nov 2026
\nWe commonly understand radiation as the circulation of energy in the form of light\, heat\, and radio waves\, illumination and glow\, or the emission of particles from radioactive substances. This includes ultraviolet radiation\, X and gamma rays and radioactive materials. The early 20th century medical use of X-rays was exquisitely captured by Duchamp in his 1910 painting Portrait of Dr. Dumochel. In this work\, the French physician is shown with a red aura &ndash\; presumably depicting the erythema of radiation &ndash\; while parts of his body are missing to connote the mysterious ability of X rays to invisibilise flesh while making bones and internal organs visible. A little over a century later\, diagnostic mammograms\, full-body airport security scans\, even personal radiation-emitting devices (mobile phones) are the norm. Ionising radiation is used in Heritage Studies to identify underdrawings while gamma radiation eliminates bacteria that threaten to damage cultural objects\, books and statues.
\n\; \; \; \;However\, this source-process-effect frame\, prevalent in many\, if not most disciplines\, is not the only way to think radiation. Several years ago\, researchers from the University of Regensburg\, Germany\, discovered a phenomenon akin to negative radiation. When an electron moves through a material it often collides with other electrons. This causes de-acceleration. Although an electron with negative mass loses energy in the same way that an electron with positive mass does\, the effect of that loss is\, counterintuitively: acceleration. In other words\, if a ball with negative mass falls into water\, it is not slowed down by friction but instead sped up. Using a new type of semiconductor and irradiating it with a red laser\, the Regensburg team found that\, surprisingly\, the electrons emitted a blue glimmer. This signalled a conversion of low-energy red light into the high-energy blue light arising from electrons with negative mass (Lin et al 2021). Experiments such as these beg the question of the scope of &lsquo\;negative&rsquo\; radiation\, caused by phenomena like negative force.
\n\; \; \; \;In the cultural and socio-political realms\, the invisible working of radiation is captured by two past-laden concepts: aura and hauntology. As a &lsquo\;strange tissue of space-time\,&rsquo\; and a &lsquo\;unique apparition of distance in proximity&rsquo\; (Benjamin 1979)\, aura amplifies energies accruing in everyday practices as affective presence. It turns sedimentations of mnemonic processes into &lsquo\;weakly radioactive materials&rsquo\; (Sloterdijk 2016)\, as can be seen from the so-called &lsquo\;merged objects&rsquo\; &ndash\; such as the Salish blankets\, made of mountain goat\, dog hair\, and vegetation\, that are part animal\, part hunter\, part weaver\, and part wearer (Tepper 2017). Their purpose is to gather cross-species and cross-temporal relations into a single\, culturally energised object. Similarly\, accrued medial aura is the topic of much contemporary art\, such as Kubisch and Norment&rsquo\;s sonic installations\, which rely on the medial memory of transmitters. The crackling of an old record\, inscribed through cycles of use\, and remediated in a sound installation\, creates fulcrums of energy similar to that of &lsquo\;merged objects.&rsquo\;
\n\; \; \; \;Hauntology\, along with spectrality\, was initially a rumination on ontology. It suggested that being is displaced by the shadow of the spectre of being (Derrida 1993)\, and that past-orientated resurgences undermine the solid foundations of the present (Jameson 1999). This can be felt in the residual working of obsolete hegemonies that continue to exert influence on the material and psychic spaces of social life. Unlike trauma\, which is marked by a rupture\, hauntological radiation is a form of low-frequency persistence that lingers in habits and inherited assignments of energy\, imperceptibly turning the past into the behavioural and cognitive architecture of the present. Carrying the frequencies of absent systems\, and of that which &lsquo\;has not yet happened but is already effective in the virtual &ndash\; as an attractor shaping current behaviour&rsquo\; (Fisher 2012: 19)\, hauntings co-constitute energy fields. But this is not to say that all hauntings are immaterial\, as is often thought. In Barad&rsquo\;s reading\, they are an &lsquo\;ineliminable feature of existing material conditions&rsquo\; (Barad 2017: 107)\, as\, from the perspective of quantum physics\, haunting is not about human experience\, but rather about &lsquo\;indeterminacies of time-being\, materially constitutive of matter itself&rsquo\; (113).
\nSimilarly\, in this conference\, we are interested in the less visible actual and potential radial arrangements &ndash\; as forms of agencement of actual or virtual objects and un-objects\, spaces and negative spaces\, organisms\, pre- and post-organic matter\; proto-techniques and technologies that can be assimilated into what is often called &lsquo\;third nature.&rsquo\;
\nWe invite contributions from Media Studies\, Art and Art-Science\, Philosophy (including Philosophy of Science)\, Cultural and Heritage Studies\, Materials Science and Environmental Studies in the form of individual panel presentations (theoretical or practice-based) or curated panels that address but are not limited to the following topics:
\n&bull\;Contemporary alchemy (the notion that every being and/or thing can potentially produce or store energy)
\n&bull\;Art-science experiments with cross-medial radiation (e.g. sonic lasers)
\n&bull\;Projective radiations of new materials or new uses of existing materials\, plants and environments (e.g. graphene and hyperaccumulators)
\n&bull\;Biological and geometrical radial arrangements (e.g. radical versus networked spread)
\n&bull\;Explorations and genealogies of radio-enabled technologies and engineering practices (e.g. GPS\, Galileo\, Wi-Fi and RFID)
\n&bull\;Propelling or accelerating processes arising from a re-configuration or re-alignment of forces and technologies
\n&bull\;Counterintuitive readings of radiation (e.g. the use of radioactive waste as a source of energy despite obvious dangers)
\n&bull\;Political and ideological radiation (soft power\, influence) \;
\n&bull\;Infrastructural radiation (capital\, energy networks) \;
\n&bull\;Computational and algorithmic radiation (data\, AI\, virality)
\n&bull\;The post-industrial sublime (e.g. hydrogen colliders and sites of industrial devastation)
\n&bull\;Radiation as action-at-a-distance (conceptual History of Physics) \;
\n&bull\;Novel readings of the work of Henri Becquerel\, Marie Curie\, J.M. Maxwell\, Richard Feynman and Rudolf Peierls beyond the &lsquo\;environmental damage of positivistic science&rsquo\; approach
\nPlease send 250 w proposals for individual papers or artistic interventions of 15 min in length\, accompanied by a 100 w bio and a concise list of AV requirements to ENERGYPhilosophyofPractice@dundee.ac.uk by 23:59 GMT on 20 July 2026. Proposals for panels of no more than 1500 w in length (including abstracts and bios) should be sent by 23:59 GMT on 12 July 2026. Notifications of acceptance will be sent by 30 July 2026. \;
\nThis conference\, supported by Arnolfini and UWE Bristol\, is part of the 2023 &ndash\; 2027 AHRC-funded research project ENERGY: A Philosophy of Practice (AH/X009114/1).
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Tehran:20261117T090000 DTEND;TZID=Asia/Tehran:20261118T170000 SUMMARY:Divine Agency/Action UID:20260930T143406Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:Asia/Tehran LOCATION:mam Khomeini International University Blvd\, Qazvīn\, Iran DESCRIPTION:The Iranian Association for the Philosophy of Religion\, in cooperation with Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU)\, presents:
\nTheme: Divine Agency/Action Conference Themes Divine Agency/Action in the History of Thought and Religions
\nSemantics of Divine Action
\nOntology of Divine Agency/Action
\nEpistemology of Divine Agency/Action
\nMethodology of the Study of Divine Agency/Action
\nCompeting Theories of Divine Agency/Action
\nAcademic Board
\nConference Chair: Reza Akbari
\nScientific Secretary: Majid Mollayousefi
\nConference Dates: 17&ndash\;18 November 2026
\nAbstract Submission Deadline: 18 September 2026
\nNotification of Acceptance: 9 October 2026
\nVenue: Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU)
\nThe conference will be held in a hybrid format (both virtually and in person)
\nSubmission Guidelines
\nTo register for CPR2026\, you must first submit your abstract through the conference submission page. (here)
\nTo submit an abstract\, you should prepare the following:
\nSubmitted abstracts will be reviewed by the conference referees and will receive one of the following decisions: Accepted\, Rejected\, Accepted subject to revisions
\nThe registration fee is payable only after the abstract has been accepted. Authors must send a scanned copy or photograph of the payment receipt in reply to the acceptance email.
\nAuthors whose papers are selected for oral presentation are expected to submit an extended abstract of approximately 2\,000 words to the conference secretariat before the conference.
\nAuthors may submit multiple abstracts. However\, after peer review and acceptance\, only one single-authored paper and one co-authored paper per author will be published.
\nRegistration Fees
\nNote: Payment instructions will be provided to authors of accepted abstracts. Catering costs during the conference will be calculated separately and announced to participants before the conference.
\nHigh-resolution conference poster
\nConference Secretariat Contact
\nPhone: +98 902 908 0340
\nEmail:philorconf@gmail.com
ORGANIZER;CN=Iranian Association for Philosophy of Religion Philosophy of Religion: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20261117T093000 DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20261117T170000 SUMMARY:Observation\, Theory\, and Progress in Seismology UID:20260930T143407Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:America/Los_Angeles LOCATION:1200 E CALIFORNIA BLVD.\, Pasadena\, United States\, 91125 DESCRIPTION:Detailed description:
The workshop &ldquo\;Observation\, Theory\, and Progress in Seismology&rdquo\; will bring together researchers from seismology and from history and philosophy of science to address the relation between theory\, observation/instrumentation and progress in seismology. \; \; Many accounts of progress in science tell a story that focuses largely on theoretical breakthroughs&mdash\;just think of how the theoretical achievements of Newton\, Einstein\, or Darwin are thought to mark the progress of modern science. Yet our capacity to &ldquo\;observe&rdquo\; (broadly understood) nature has progressed in no less impressive ways\, across the natural sciences\, from early telescopes to the massive interferometers of the LIGO project\, from magnifying glasses to electron microscopes\, and from intensity scales to broadband seismometry and global seismic networks. How have improvements in observational capabilities led to progress in the physical sciences? In what ways are the development of instrumentation and theory interdependent? Seismology is a science that we might see as having largely been driven by the development of instrumentation\, but developments in seismological theory have also been crucial for progress. The study of seismology from a historical and philosophical perspective is likely to uncover new insights into how science in general and seismology in particular makes progress. \; \;
Sttructure:
There will be 4 talks and a panel discussion.
The talks will be given by Hiroo Kanamori (Caltech)\, Susan Hough (USGS)\, Teru Mirake (NTU Singapore)\, and Alisa Bokulich (Boston University).
The panel discusion will be led by Miguel Ohnesorge (University of Boston)\, Jamee Elder (Tufts)\, Lucy Jones (Caltech)\, and Thomas Heaton (Caltech).
\nAnyone with an interest in the topic is welcome to attend. \;
\n
RSVP here:
https://forms.office.com/pages/responsepage.aspx?id=2elb_XJ7-U2DDrH5zFtEvQ8hmfRMv91Hjr2YcxI3VD5UNUFNQjdWQkVBS1lESUI5S1NEQURVWUJMTy4u&\;route=shorturl
Call for Registration
\nRegistration is now open for the conference Learning from History: The Philosophies of Historiography and the Historical Sciences\, which will take place at the University of Ostrava from November 27-29. If you would like to attend\, please register by November 1 by emailing
For the preliminary programme and the book of abstracts\, please see here:
Call for Papers:
\nLearning from History: The Philosophies of Historiography and the Historical Sciences
\nThe University of Ostrava\, Czech Republic\, 27-29 November 2026
\nConfirmed keynote speakers (alphabetically):
\nCarol Cleland
\nAdrian Currie
\nMichal Hubá\;lek
\nJouni-Matti Kuukkanen
\nJames McAllister
\nGregory Radick
\nAdam Timmins
\nAviezer Tucker
\nDerek Turner
\nThe philosophy of history\, the ontology of the past\, and the philosophy of historiography\, the epistemology of knowledge of history\, are rapidly expanding philosophical fields. \; This expansion is partly driven by the progress of the historical sciences in broadening the scope of our knowledge of history by discovering new evidence and new information theories that allow decoding it and inferring knowledge of the past. \; These developments call for new philosophies of the historical sciences and historiography that encompass the new ontologies and epistemologies of all the historical sciences that can make warranted inferences about history.
\nThe philosophy of the historical sciences is distinct of other sub-fields of epistemology and the philosophy of science in studying the generation of knowledge of the past\, of history\, which depends on signals that cross the entropic barrier of time. \; This conference will consider the philosophical\, ontological and epistemic implications of the new historical sciences and historiography that form the foundation for learning from the past. This conference will attempt to found a new sub-field of the philosophy of science\, devoted to the philosophy of the historical sciences. \;
\nThe conference will take place at the Foundation for the Philosophy of Historical Sciences and Historiography at the University of Ostrava in the Czech Republic\, with support from the Visegrad Fund and the University of Ostrava\, and in cooperation with the University of Silesia in Katowice in Poland\, and the Catholic University in Ružomberok in Slovakia. \;
\nWe call for abstracts of 250-500 words in the philosophy of historiography and the historical sciences to be submitted by the 31st of August 2026. \; There will not be a conference fee\, but registration is required. \; Please send abstracts\, queries\, and correspondence to:
\nAviezer Tucker at avitucker@yahoo.com and David Černí\;n at david.cernin@osu.cz
\nThe Foundation for the Philosophy of Historical Sciences and Historiography is comprised of five researchers and has existed for three years with generous support from the European Union\, the Czech Grant Agency\, and the Visegrad Fund. It holds regular in person and remote seminars. \; Next year\, in August 2027\, it will co-convene a summer school in the philosophy of historiography and the historical sciences with emphasis on the philosophical foundations of applied history at the Catholic University of Ružomberok in Slovakia.
\nOstrava\, in the North-East corner of the Czech Republic\, is the second largest urban conglomeration in the country after Prague. It has an airport with regular flights from Warsaw\, Malaga\, and London-Stansted. \; It can also be reached by bus from the airports of Katowice and Krakow in Poland\, and by train from Vienna and Prague. By train\, Ostrava is about 2.5 hours from Krakow\, 3 hours from Vienna\, and 3.5 hours from Prague.
\nThe conference is part of the project &ldquo\;What Can be Learned from History: Philosophical Reflections from Central Europe&rdquo\; co-financed by the governments of Czechia\, Hungary\, Poland and Slovakia through Visegrad Grants from \;the International Visegrad Fund. The mission of the fund is to advance ideas for sustainable regional cooperation in Central Europe.
ORGANIZER;CN=Georg Gangl;CN="David Černín";CN=Aviezer Tucker: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Hong_Kong:20261128T090000 DTEND;TZID=Asia/Hong_Kong:20261128T170000 SUMMARY:Philosophies Meet Animals UID:20260930T143409Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:Asia/Hong_Kong LOCATION:HKUST\, Hong Kong\, Hong Kong DESCRIPTION:Recent decades have witnessed advances in biology\, cognitive science\, and neuroscience which inspired and promoted philosophical discussions on animal cognition\, animal behaviour\, animal minds\, and animal welfare. Empirical studies show extraordinary findings: rats and bats willingly aid kin\; cetaceans communicate over vast distances with cultural traits\; chimpanzee societies exhibit alliances and intrigues\; elephants display grief and rage\; crows craft tools and demonstrate causal reasoning and future planning. All these lead to interesting\, important philosophical questions. How should we interpret these findings? What philosophical assumptions underlie them? What implications can we make for traditional philosophical issues? This workshop aims to explore new philosophical insights informed or inspired by empirical studies on animal cognition\, animal behaviour\, and etc. It is devoted to offer a platform for dialogues between philosophers and scientists to cross boundaries. We welcome submissions from both philosophers and scientists. Submissions from early career scholars and postgraduate students are particularly welcome. This workshop is supported by the Jiangsu-Hong Kong-Macao University Alliance. Selected contributed speakers from universities in Jiangsu are eligible to apply for free accommodation. \;
ORGANIZER;CN=Yafeng Shan;CN=Xiaotao Liu: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261130T100000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261201T170000 SUMMARY:Philosophy of Science and Ethics of Science in the Context of A. Schopenhauer UID:20260930T143410Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:Europe/Berlin LOCATION:Schlossplatz 2\, Münster\, Germany DESCRIPTION:In recent years\, Schopenhauer has increasingly been recognized as a significant point of reference for work in both philosophy of science and ethics of science. In addition to foundational studies of his theory of science\, there is growing interest in his influence on particular disciplines\, including biology\, physics\, mathematics\, and cognitive science. The conference aims to bring these lines of research into conversation and to explore their broader systematic relevance.
ORGANIZER;CN=Jens Lemanski: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261130T234500 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261130T234500 SUMMARY:Philosophia Reformata special issue on the legacy of MD Stafleu UID:20260930T143411Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Call for Papers: \;The legacy of M. D. Stafleu
\nJournal: \;Philosophia Reformata \;(www.brill.com/phir)
\nGuest editors: Richard Gunton (Queen Mary University of London) and Gerrit Glas (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)
\nDeadline: Papers (5\,000&ndash\;9\,000 words) may be submitted through the journal&rsquo\;s website.
\nMarinus Dirk (Dick) Stafleu (1937&ndash\;2024) wrote extensively on philosophy of physics\, and encyclopedically on the sciences at large. \;Drawing on and critiquing the work of Herman Dooyeweerd\, he made important contributions to a Reformational philosophy of science reaching from mathematics to social and political sciences. \;However\, since his passing in November 2024\, Stafleu's legacy appears largely limited to his 24 papers in Philosophia Reformata\, 5 papers in other peer-reviewed journals\, and some 15 books in English and Dutch\, mostly self-published on his own website (although 5 were published in print by various minor publishing houses).
\nWe invite scholars who have drawn on any of Stafleu's work to contribute to a special issue that will clarify and situate his contributions in the philosophical foundations of physics and of the sciences more broadly. \;Topics might include\, for example:
\nFor more information\, please contact the editorial assistant\, Mathanja Berger: \;mathanja@bergeracademicediting.nl.
\n\nInstructions to Authors: \; https://brill.com/fileasset/downloads_products/Author_Instructions/PHIR.pdf
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20261211T234500 DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20261211T234500 SUMMARY:2027 Philosophy of Social Science Roundtable UID:20260930T143412Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:America/Los_Angeles LOCATION:Claremont\, United States DESCRIPTION:We welcome extended abstracts (between 600-1200 words) for papers on any topic in the philosophy of the social sciences\, especially those that allow interdisciplinary research connections and that are consequential for practicing social scientists. Papers in all areas of the philosophy of the social sciences are encouraged\, including in the philosophy of economics and political science\, as well as in underrepresented areas\, such as the philosophy of psychology and philosophy of history. \;The two-day workshop will allow intensive discussion of the work of its contributors. \;Selected papers will be published in a special issue of Philosophy of the Social Sciences.
\nPlease email submissions to phi.soc.sci@gmail.com no later than December 11\, 2026. Abstracts should be anonymized and attached to the email as a Microsoft Word document. In the body of the email\, please include your full name and affiliation. \;We may have a small amount of funding available to partially subsidize travel for graduate students whose papers are accepted and who have no access to institutional funding. \;Please indicate in your email if you would like to be considered for such a subsidy.
\nThis year&rsquo\;s Roundtable will include keynote addresses from Seva Gunitsky (Political Science\, University of Toronto) and Lauren Ross (Logic and Philosophy of Science\, UC Irvine).
\nThe 2027 Roundtable is supported by the Dean of Faculty&rsquo\;s Office\, Faculty Research Committee\, Gould Center for Humanistic Studies\, and Department of Philosophy at Claremont McKenna College.
ORGANIZER;CN=S. Andrew Schroeder;CN=Mark Risjord;CN=Kareem Khalifa;CN="Cailin O’Connor": METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261215T230000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261215T230000 SUMMARY:Synthese Topical Collection: Severity and Learning from Error UID:20260930T143413Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Synthese Topical Collection: Severity and Learning from Error
\nCall for Papers
\nThis Topical Collection examines how inquiry learns from error by focusing on a basic principle of evidence in science\, statistics\, medicine\, law\, epistemology\, and day-to-day learning: a claim is not well-tested\, known or epistemically warranted\, if it is based on a method that makes it easy to accept\, conclude or infer the claim\, even if it is false. Such a claim may accord well with the data\, but it has not passed a stringent or severe test. While this overarching intuition is widely shared\, the problem of how to understand or satisfy it remains unsolved. C. S. Peirce emphasizes randomization and (what is now called) pre-designation to achieve self-correcting methods. Popper viewed severity in terms of satisfying novel predictive success and surviving stringent attempts at falsification. Deborah Mayo (1996\, 2018) combines elements from Popper and Peirce with the use of error probabilities from statistical methods: proposed solutions to problems earn warrant by surviving probes that were capable of showing them wrong or inadequate. This Topical Collection takes &ldquo\;severity&rdquo\; to be a broad meta-level concept according to which a claim &ndash\; whether a report of a perception\, a prediction\, a hypothesis\, or part of a model &ndash\; is assessed according to whether\, and how readily\, its errors and inadequacies would have been found\, if present.
\nSeveral questions arise: What errors matter for a given aim? What would it take for a method to be capable of detecting them? How in actual practice can inquirers show they have engaged in responsible error probing when there are no formal probability models? Addressing questions like these is of urgent importance today as we face high-powered methods that make it easy to find impressive looking eUects that are spurious and non-replicating\, or to arrive at well-fitting models that do not predict well\, do not replicate\, or do not provide substantive scientific understanding. These questions arise in debates about methodological shifts in AI/ML\, randomized clinical trials\, legal evidence\, climate modeling\, statistical inference\, and error-prone inference in general. We seek to bring these metascience debates into direct contact and to ask what is often left hidden: What errors are now being controlled\, and which have quietly dropped out of view? By bringing together philosophers\, statisticians\, and scientists\, we aim to develop a shared set of problems and tools with a forward-looking goal: to shape emerging practices\, rather than merely react to them with retrospective commentary.
\nWe welcome submissions on any topic that broadly relates to severity or learning from error. We invite contributions that develop\, apply or challenge severity-based reasoning\, or that develop alternative approaches\, Bayesian\, frequentist\, machine-learning and other\, which engage the same underlying concern: how inquiry learns from error\, and how claims earn warrant by surviving probes that were capable of showing them wrong or inadequate. We encourage contributions that explore connections between concepts of severity in diUerent fields. Notably\, the concepts of sensitivity and safety in contemporary epistemology can be understood through the lens of severity\, and both are redolent of stability in AI. We also welcome discussions of how contemporary manifestations of severity interrelate with the traditional notions of severity from Popper and Peirce\, and how concepts of severity may help in tackling fundamental problems of induction\, falsification\, underdetermination\, and realism in philosophy of science.
\nThe collection is partly motivated by the thirtieth anniversary of Deborah Mayo&rsquo\;s (1996\, Chicago) Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge (Lakatos Prize 1998) and the development of its account of severe testing.
\nAppropriate Topics for Submission include\, among others:
\nSeverity and philosophy of statistics
\n&bull\;Do recent controversies about the uses of error probabilities in statistics (and metastatistics) present a challenge to severity-based reasoning?
\n&bull\;Do the new fields of post-selection inference (in AI and other disciplines) allow for error control despite data-driven constructions? Or do they shift attention to diUerent errors?
\n&bull\;How does severity link to such notions as calibration\, security\, and stability\, and statistical techniques that promote such notions as robustness analyses\, and multiverse analyses?
\nSeverity and philosophy of science
\n&bull\;What does it mean for a method\, or for science itself\, to be self-correcting or error-correcting? Does it fit best with a pragmatist philosophy?
\n&bull\;How does severe probing take place in the historical sciences\, e.g.\, climate science\, geology? Can claims be well probed without being replicable?
\n&bull\;Rather than probing for falsity\, how can we severely probe if a model is adequate for a purpose or problem of interest?
\nSeverity and contemporary epistemology
\n&bull\;Can a useful cross-cutting epistemology that links science\, statistics\, and applied epistemology be built around the concept of severity?
\n&bull\;Do features of severity (e.g.\, auditing of assumptions) point to ways to avoid problems of sensitivity and safety in epistemology?
\n&bull\;Does requiring severity explain why legal epistemology resists mere base-rates and &ldquo\;naked statistics&rdquo\;? Does it solve proof paradoxes in legal epistemology?
\nTracking shifts in error control
\n&bull\;How does AI/ML shift from modeling data-generating mechanisms in statistics to optimizing predictive performance in machine learning.
\n&bull\;How do changing guidelines for RCTs shift trials from probing biological mechanisms to predicting average treatment eUects over a population?
\n&bull\;What are the social\, epistemic\, ethical\, and political consequences of shifting regimens of error control?
\nThe value of probing error
\n&bull\;How can adversarial collaborations and stress-testing advance science?
\n&bull\;How can error repertoires be built and eUectively employed to facilitate severity in measurement and experiment?
\n&bull\;How does learning from error enter outside science (e.g.\, in art\, architecture and life drawing)?
\nSubmissions via: https://www.editorialmanager.com/synt/default.aspx
Under the drop-down menu\, select Severity and Learning from Error.
\;
Submitted papers will undergo the usual Synthese review process.
\;
For further information\, please contact the guest editors: Deborah Mayo (mayod@vt.edu)\, Wendy Parker (wendyparker@vt.edu)\, Danië\;l Lakens (D.Lakens@tue.nl)\, Kent Staley (kent.staley@slu.edu).
\;
The deadline for submissions is the 15th of December\, 2026
Objectivity is an important topic in the philosophy of science with implications for many debates\, including scientific confirmation\, scientific realism\, measurement\, values in science\, and theory choice. However\, defining scientific objectivity is not easy. Its meaning varies radically from different contexts. Objectivity can be a property of a product of science (e.g. scientific claims)\, or of a process of science (e.g. scientific methods). It can also be a virtue or ideal of scientific practice. This conference aims to examine the notion of objectivity across the natural and social sciences. In particular\, it will scrutinise the nature\, role\, and significance of objectivity in scientific practice.
\nQuestions to be addressed include but are not limited to:
\nSelected papers will be included in an edited volume to be published by Springer (part of the Asian Studies in the Philosophy of Science).
\nSubmission Guidelines
\nPlease submit a 500-word abstract for blind review via Oxford Abstracts (https://app.oxfordabstracts.com/stages/83122/submitter) by 31 December 2026.
\nContact
\nIf you have any questions\, please contact Qiyue Zhang (qiyue.zhang@connect.ust.hk).
ORGANIZER;CN=Yafeng Shan;CN=Qinyi Wang;CN=Qiyue Zhang: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20270115T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20270115T090000 SUMMARY:Synthese Topical Collection: Against the Grain: Developing the Prospects of Non-Naturalistic Metaphysics of Science UID:20260930T143415Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Call for Papers
\nSynthese \;Topical Collection: Against the Grain: Developing the Prospects of Non-Naturalistic Metaphysics of Science
\nGuest Editors:
Raoni Arroyo (Federal University of Santa Catarina / CNPq\, Brazil)
Bruno Borge (University of Buenos Aires / CONICET\, Argentina)\,
Cristiá\;n Soto (University of Chile\, Chile).
Topical Collection website: \;https://link.springer.com/collections/dgjhfehdbd
\nA key feature of recent developments in the metaphysics of science is that it has mostly\, if not exclusively\, been developed within a naturalistic framework. For our purposes\, naturalism can broadly be conceived in any of the following ways: it can be understood as continuous with\, constrained by\, derived from\, or useful to science.
\nWhat all these have in common is a deferential attitude towards science\, which may roughly be spelled out as follows: when it comes to ontology\, methodology\, or epistemology\, metaphysicians of science should best defer such issues to science (particularly physics). Most\, if not all\, more or less recent developments that &ldquo\;take science seriously&rdquo\; fall under the naturalistic umbrella. One possible consequence of this default naturalistic orientation is that it may unduly restrict the scope of legitimate metaphysical inquiry.
\nWe understand non-naturalistic metaphysics of science as a style of metaphysical practice whose problems need not exclusively arise within or emanate from the sciences. More specifically\, it is a kind of metaphysics that remains oriented toward science without treating science as the sole source of its problems\, methods\, or epistemic credentials. In this context\, by &ldquo\;non-naturalistic&rdquo\; we do not mean metaphysics that ignores\, or floats free from\, science\, but rather metaphysical inquiry that engages with science without being fully grounded in\, derived from\, or subordinated to it.
\nThe aim of the Topical Collection is not merely to criticize naturalism\, but to articulate positive alternatives: ways of doing metaphysics of science that engage with scientific practices\, examine the metaphysical assumptions and frontiers of science\, and remain epistemically relevant to our overall scientific outlook without adopting a deferential stance toward science.
\nBy contrast\, naturalistic metaphysics of science has science as the proper ontological\, epistemic\, and methodological ground of metaphysical inquiry. Non-naturalistic metaphysics of science asks and addresses metaphysical issues properly\, which can rightfully be considered as yielding genuine epistemic contributions to our knowledge or understanding of how the world is or could be.
\nAppropriate Topics for Submission include\, among others:
\n\nThis list is not meant to be exhaustive.
\nFor further information\, please contact the guest editors:
\nRaoni Arroyo: \;raoniarroyo@gmail.com
Bruno Borge: \;brunojborge@gmail.com
Cristiá\;n Soto: \;cssotto@uchile.cl
The deadline for submissions is \;January 15\, 2027.
\nSubmissions via: \;https://www.editorialmanager.com/synt/default.aspx
\nPlease select &ldquo\;Submit New Manuscript&rdquo\; and choose the Topical Collection &ldquo\;Against the Grain: Developing the Prospects of Non-Naturalistic Metaphysics of Science&rdquo\; from the drop-down menu.
\nRaoni Arroyo
Federal University of Santa Catarina / CNPq
Email: \;raoniarroyo@gmail.com
Bruno Borge
University of Buenos Aires / CONICET
Email: \;brunojborge@gmail.com
Cristiá\;n Soto
University of Chile
Email: \;cssotto@uchile.cl
Held annually since 1999\, POSS-RT is a meeting featuring talks covering a wide range of topics in the philosophy of the social sciences\, especially work that allows interdisciplinary research connections and that is conequential for practicing social scientists. To submit a paper for the 2027 event\, see the associated CFP. \;Information about conference registration and a full program will be posted here in early 2027.
ORGANIZER;CN=S. Andrew Schroeder;CN=Mark Risjord;CN=Kareem Khalifa;CN="Cailin O’Connor": METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20270513T090000 DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20270514T170000 SUMMARY:Values\, Trust\, and Reliability in Science UID:20260930T143417Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:America/Los_Angeles LOCATION:1410 NE Campus Way\, Seattle\, United States\, 98195 DESCRIPTION:The Department of Philosophy at the University of Washington\, Seattle is proud to announce its upcoming graduate conference titled Values\, Trust\, and Reliability in Science to be held on the UW Seattle campus on May 13 and 14\, 2027. This conference will focus on the various dimensions of science\, including questions about explanation\, methodology\, theory change\, and technological innovation. We are especially interested in proposals focusing on values in science\, broadly construed. \;
\nWe are enthusiastic to share that Kevin Elliott (Michigan State University) will be joining us in Seattle as our keynote speaker. Professor Elliott is known for his field-defining work in values in science and scientific communication. He has made major contributions to theories of the interaction between social values and science\, as well asthe responsible management of those values. He is currently studying how the institutional environment of science can be integrated more deeply into scholarship on science and values\; exploring the values served and threatened by methodological standardization in science\; and examining strategies for managing values in science\, especially in the environmental health sciences.
\nGraduate students are invited to submit abstracts of 250&ndash\;500 words via this \;Google Form.
\nWhile we encourage abstracts relevant to Professor Elliott&rsquo\;s ongoing research\, we welcome all submissions in philosophy of science. Please omit any self-identifying remarks within the body of the abstract. Abstracts should be submitted by Friday\, December 11 2026. Acceptances will be announced in January.
\nThis conference will have a pre-read format. As such\, abstracts should be suitable for development into a paper of 4\,000&ndash\;10\,000 words. Full papers are expected three weeks before the conference and will be circulated to attendees. Due to the conference&rsquo\;s pre-read format\, your presentation should be 30 minutes\, and focus on the core ideas of the paper without presenting it in its entirety. \;
ORGANIZER;CN=Kade Cicchella;CN=Natalie Dorfman;CN=Julia Pelger: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Hong_Kong:20270623T090000 DTEND;TZID=Asia/Hong_Kong:20270625T170000 SUMMARY:Objectivity across the Sciences UID:20260930T143418Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:Asia/Hong_Kong LOCATION:HKUST\, Hong Kong\, Hong Kong DESCRIPTION:Objectivity is an important topic in the philosophy of science with implications for many debates\, including scientific confirmation\, scientific realism\, measurement\, values in science\, and theory choice. However\, defining scientific objectivity is not easy. Its meaning varies radically from different contexts. Objectivity can be a property of a product of science (e.g. scientific claims)\, or of a process of science (e.g. scientific methods). It can also be a virtue or ideal of scientific practice. This conference aims to examine the notion of objectivity across the natural and social sciences. In particular\, it will scrutinise the nature\, role\, and significance of objectivity in scientific practice.
\nQuestions to be addressed include but are not limited to:
\nSelected papers will be included in an edited volume to be published by Springer (part of the Asian Studies in the Philosophy of Science).
\nIf you have any questions\, please contact Qiyue Zhang (qiyue.zhang@connect.ust.hk).
ORGANIZER;CN=Yafeng Shan;CN=Qinyi Wang;CN=Qiyue Zhang: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260929T014510Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Chicago:29990101T033000 DTEND;TZID=America/Chicago:29990201T120000 SUMMARY:POSTPONED - Creativity and Improvisation in Thought\, Practice\, and Mind: An Interdisciplinary Conference UID:20260930T143419Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:fc13:84ff:feef:467f%3 TZID:America/Chicago LOCATION:6001 Dodge Street\, Omaha\, United States\, 68182 DESCRIPTION:*Please note that this event has officially been postponed. More information will be made available asap in the near future*
\nMany human cognitive capacities and processes may be deployed creatively\, from unique choices made for oneself up through novel cultural shifts. Similarly\, large swaths of our daily lives are taken up with performing spontaneous\, on-the-fly\, and unplanned activities that are\, in a word\, improvised. \; Charting out the nature of both creativity and improvisation\, taken individually or together\, remains an open and pressing issue. In this conference\, we will delve into various philosophical\, theoretical\, empirical\, and interdisciplinary issues that are related to creativity and improvisation. A non-exhaustive list of related questions and themes for this topic include:
\n- What is the relationship between improvisation and creativity?
\n- What is the relationship between creative activity and well-being?
\n- What is the best way to model individual and collective creativity?
\n- Is creativity in the arts the same thing as in other domains\, such as in science or business?
\n- What are the pros and cons of different scientific operationalizations of creativity and improvisation?
\n- Provide a conceptual analysis of creativity and/or improvisation.
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR