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