Eurograd message

                International Conference on Simplicities and Complexities
<br>22-24 May 2019
<br>Bonn, Germany
<br>Call for Papers - Deadline: 15 January 2019
<br>https://www.lhc-epistemologie.uni-wuppertal.de/complexities
<br>https://easychair.org/cfp/simplecomplex1
<br>
<br>
<br>Simplicities and Complexities" will take place from 22 to 24 May 2019 at the
<br>University of Bonn, Germany. It aims to bring together scientists and scholars
<br>from a spectrum of disciplines such as physics, biology, ecology, chemistry,
<br>and computational science, as well as from philosophy, sociology, and history
<br>of science. This conference is organized by the interdisciplinary, DFG- and
<br>FWF-funded research unit "Epistemology of the LHC".
<br>
<br>Philosophers and scientists alike have often assumed simplicity to be an
<br>epistemic ideal. Some examples of theories taken as successful realizations of
<br>this ideal include General Relativity and Darwin's theory of Natural
<br>Selection. These theories influenced early and mid-20th century philosophers'
<br>understanding of the criteria successful scientific theories and practices had
<br>to meet, even when facing complex phenomena. However, this influence did not
<br>mean that the notion of simplicity was clear-cut. A suitable and encompassing
<br>definition of simplicity has yet to be developed. Some unanswered questions
<br>include: In what sense can and do physicists consider a theory, such as the
<br>Standard Model of elementary particle physics, as being sufficiently simple?
<br>How do ideals of simplicity differ when applied to disciplines other than
<br>physics? Biological concepts, for example, do not tend to refer to laws,
<br>whereas concepts from the social sciences frequently resort to notions of
<br>order and structure that are different from those of natural sciences. Are
<br>there, accordingly, simplicities (in plural) rather than a unified
<br>logic-inspired notion? Finally, are there cases where simplicity is simply a
<br>bad epistemic ideal, and not merely for the reason that it is often
<br>unreachable?
<br>
<br>Throughout the 20th century the sciences have approached more and more complex
<br>phenomena, in tune with the increased social relevance of scientific
<br>knowledge. The perceived need to address complexity head-on has led to a
<br>broader reaction against simplification and reductionism within the sciences.
<br>However, if simplicity, in its various outfits, has proven an unreliable
<br>guide, what should it be replaced with? Looking at the various strategies of
<br>addressing complexity in the sciences and the disciplines reflecting upon
<br>them, it appears that the notion is at least as variegated as simplicity. To
<br>be sure, there exist measures of complexity as well as mathematical,
<br>empirical, or discursive strategies to deal with it, but they vary strongly
<br>from one discipline to another.
<br>
<br>The aim of the conference is to analyze, differentiate, and connect the
<br>various notions and practices of simplicity and complexity, in physics as well
<br>as in other sciences, guided by the following questions:
<br>
<br>
<br>Which kinds and levels of simplicity can be distinguished (e.g. formal or
<br>ontological, structural or practical)? Which roles do they play and which
<br>purposes do they serve? Does simplicity, in a suitable reformulation, remain a
<br>valid ideal - and if so, in which fields and problem contexts? Or, instead,
<br>where has it been abandoned or replaced by a plurality of interconnected
<br>approaches and alternative perspectives?
<br>What about complexity? How is the complexity of an object of investigation
<br>addressed (represented, mirrored, negated, etc.) by the adopted theoretical
<br>and empirical approaches in different fields?
<br>Addressing complex problems, especially those relevant to society, requires
<br>institutional settings beyond the traditional research laboratory. How does
<br>the complexity of such settings relate to the complexity of epistemic
<br>strategies and of the problems themselves? In what sense can we trust the
<br>other players in a complex epistemic network?
<br>How should we conceive of the relation between simplicity and complexity? Are
<br>there alternatives to seeing complexity in opposition to simplicity? Does
<br>physics, in virtue of its history, maintain its special position in the
<br>contemporary debates on simplicity and complexity? What do reflections on the
<br>epistemic cultures of ecology, cultural anthropology, economics, etc. have to
<br>offer in terms of how simplicities and complexities can be balanced?
<br>We invite contributors from a spectrum of disciplines, scientists and scholars
<br>reflecting on their respective and neighboring research fields, as well as
<br>historians, philosophers, and sociologists of science investigating the
<br>epistemologies, practices, and discourses of fellow epistemic communities. The
<br>conference will thrive on intense discussion surpassing disciplinary
<br>boundaries.
<br>
<br>
<br>Invited Speakers
<br>
<br>STS:
<br>Talia Dan-Cohen, Washington University in St. Louis (US)
<br>Stefan Bschen, RWTH Aachen (Germany)
<br>
<br>Philosophy:
<br>Michael Stltzner, University of South Carolina (US)
<br>Marta Bertolaso, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome (Italy)
<br>Alan Baker, Swarthmore College (US)
<br>
<br>Ecology:
<br>Volker Grimm, Helmholtz Centre for Enviromental Research (Germany)
<br>
<br>Chemistry:
<br>Thomas Vogt, University of South Carolina (US)
<br>
<br>Physics:
<br>Robert Harlander, RWTH Aachen (Germany)
<br>Stephen Blundell, University of Oxford (UK)
<br>Beate Heinemann, DESY Freiburg (Germany)
<br>
<br>Other speakers will be announced soon
<br>
<br>
<br>Call for Papers
<br>https://easychair.org/cfp/simplecomplex1
<br>The organisation committee invites abstract submissions on the theme of the
<br>conference. Short abstracts (200-300 words) should be submitted to EasyChair
<br>by 15 January 2019. We aim to communicate our decision by 28 February.
<br>Submissions are welcome from the broad spectrum of scientific fields.
<br>Organization
<br>This workshop is organized by the DFG and FWF-funded research unit
<br>"Epistemology of the LHC".
<br>
<br>	Cristin Chall (University of Bonn)
<br>	Dennis Lehmkuhl (University of Bonn)
<br>	Niels Martens (RWTH Aachen)
<br>	Martina Merz (University of Klagenfurt)
<br>	Miguel ngel Carretero Sahuquillo (University of Wuppertal)
<br>	Gregor Schiemann (University of Wuppertal)
<br>	Michael Stltzner (University of South Carolina)
<br>
<br>
<br>Contact
<br>For further information, please contact lhc.epistemology@uni-wuppertal.de
<br>_______________________________________________
<br>EASST's Eurograd mailing list
<br>Eurograd (at) lists.easst.net
<br>Unsubscribe or edit subscription options: http://lists.easst.net/listinfo.cgi/eurograd-easst.net
<br>
<br>Meet us via https://twitter.com/STSeasst
<br>
<br>Report abuses of this list to Eurograd-owner@lists.easst.net