The motivation for this conference stems from the conviction that recent philosophical scholarship on the range of cognitive attitudes available to scientists and the differences between them (consider, e.g., believing, accepting, entertaining, conjecturing, supposing, etc.) could prove valuable for enriching the literature on values and science. For example, disputes over the proper roles for non-epistemic values in responding to situations of underdetermination might be clarified by analyzing the range of cognitive attitudes available to scientists in such situations (e.g., belief vs. acceptance) and the sorts of values that are relevant when adopting particular attitudes. The literature on values in science might also be strengthened by reflecting on the cognitive attitudes that scientists adopt toward simplified models or toward technoscientific artifacts and the sorts of epistemic, ethical, and pragmatic values that promote the aims associated with those attitudes. Related questions concern the cognitive attitudes that scientists adopt when they propound claims as voices of authority in policy contexts and the sorts of values that become relevant to their work as a result.
The motivation for this conference stems from the conviction that recent philosophical scholarship on the range of cognitive attitudes available to scientists and the differences between them (consider, e.g., believing, accepting, entertaining, conjecturing, supposing, etc.) could prove valuable for enriching the literature on values and science. For example, disputes over the proper roles for non-epistemic values in responding to situations of underdetermination might be clarified by analyzing the range of cognitive attitudes available to scientists in such situations (e.g., belief vs. acceptance) and the sorts of values that are relevant when adopting particular attitudes. The literature on values in science might also be strengthened by reflecting on the cognitive attitudes that scientists adopt toward simplified models or toward technoscientific artifacts and the sorts of epistemic, ethical, and pragmatic values that promote the aims associated with those attitudes. Related questions concern the cognitive attitudes that scientists adopt when they propound claims as voices of authority in policy contexts and the sorts of values that become relevant to their work as a result.
It is a well recognized phenomenon that astronomical ideas, theories, and data have historically crossed cultural and disciplinary boundaries. For the Eleventh Biennial History of Astronomy Workshop, we invite submissions that explore the theme of diffusion of astronomical knowledge. We understand “diffusion” to be a broad category: How did astronomical theories pass from on culture to another? What ideas expressed in one language or worldview were modified when passing into another system? How do subcultures within a single broader culture, such as professional and amateur within the same geographical region, interact? How do new discoveries make their way through a scientific community, and how do they eventually get rejected or accepted? How does knowledge pass from specialists to the broader popular culture? How do instruments play a role in transferring and shaping knowledge, especially as they pass between cultures? As in previous years, we expect that the theme can encompass a number of different time periods and geographical locations. Proposals that directly address the theme will receive preferential treatment.
It is a well recognized phenomenon that astronomical ideas, theories, and data have historically crossed cultural and disciplinary boundaries. For the Eleventh Biennial History of Astronomy Workshop, we invite submissions that explore the theme of diffusion of astronomical knowledge. We understand “diffusion” to be a broad category: How did astronomical theories pass from on culture to another? What ideas expressed in one language or worldview were modified when passing into another system? How do subcultures within a single broader culture, such as professional and amateur within the same geographical region, interact? How do new discoveries make their way through a scientific community, and how do they eventually get rejected or accepted? How does knowledge pass from specialists to the broader popular culture? How do instruments play a role in transferring and shaping knowledge, especially as they pass between cultures? As in previous years, we expect that the theme can encompass a number of different time periods and geographical locations. Proposals that directly address the theme will receive preferential treatment.
It is a well recognized phenomenon that astronomical ideas, theories, and data have historically crossed cultural and disciplinary boundaries. For the Eleventh Biennial History of Astronomy Workshop, we invite submissions that explore the theme of diffusion of astronomical knowledge. We understand “diffusion” to be a broad category: How did astronomical theories pass from on culture to another? What ideas expressed in one language or worldview were modified when passing into another system? How do subcultures within a single broader culture, such as professional and amateur within the same geographical region, interact? How do new discoveries make their way through a scientific community, and how do they eventually get rejected or accepted? How does knowledge pass from specialists to the broader popular culture? How do instruments play a role in transferring and shaping knowledge, especially as they pass between cultures? As in previous years, we expect that the theme can encompass a number of different time periods and geographical locations. Proposals that directly address the theme will receive preferential treatment.
It is a well recognized phenomenon that astronomical ideas, theories, and data have historically crossed cultural and disciplinary boundaries. For the Eleventh Biennial History of Astronomy Workshop, we invite submissions that explore the theme of diffusion of astronomical knowledge. We understand “diffusion” to be a broad category: How did astronomical theories pass from on culture to another? What ideas expressed in one language or worldview were modified when passing into another system? How do subcultures within a single broader culture, such as professional and amateur within the same geographical region, interact? How do new discoveries make their way through a scientific community, and how do they eventually get rejected or accepted? How does knowledge pass from specialists to the broader popular culture? How do instruments play a role in transferring and shaping knowledge, especially as they pass between cultures? As in previous years, we expect that the theme can encompass a number of different time periods and geographical locations. Proposals that directly address the theme will receive preferential treatment.
It is a well recognized phenomenon that astronomical ideas, theories, and data have historically crossed cultural and disciplinary boundaries. For the Eleventh Biennial History of Astronomy Workshop, we invite submissions that explore the theme of diffusion of astronomical knowledge. We understand “diffusion” to be a broad category: How did astronomical theories pass from on culture to another? What ideas expressed in one language or worldview were modified when passing into another system? How do subcultures within a single broader culture, such as professional and amateur within the same geographical region, interact? How do new discoveries make their way through a scientific community, and how do they eventually get rejected or accepted? How does knowledge pass from specialists to the broader popular culture? How do instruments play a role in transferring and shaping knowledge, especially as they pass between cultures? As in previous years, we expect that the theme can encompass a number of different time periods and geographical locations. Proposals that directly address the theme will receive preferential treatment.
