Logic List Mailing Archive

International Conference on Simplicities & Complexities

22-24 May 2019
Bonn, Germany

International Conference on Simplicities and Complexities
22-24 May 2019
Bonn, Germany

Call for Papers + Essay Competition - Deadline: 15 January 2019

https://www.lhc-epistemologie.uni-wuppertal.de/complexities 
https://easychair.org/cfp/simplecomplex1


"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 <https://www.lhc-epistemologie.uni-wuppertal.de/home.html>".

Call for Papers

https://easychair.org/cfp/simplecomplex1

The organizing 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. In addition to being considered for giving a contributing talk, 
all submissions will also be considered for our essay competition.

Essay competition

All submitted abstracts will also automatically be considered for the 
â?~Simplicities & Complexities Essay Competitionâ?T. (If you do not want 
your abstract to be considered for this competition, please indicate this 
through EasyChair at the time of application.) From the list of applicants 
selected to give contributing talks, a shortlist of the six best 
submissions will be determined. These six finalists enter the final round 
of the Essay Competition. They will be contacted by February 15th, and 
asked to submit a 3000-5000-word essay before April 15th. One winner will 
be chosen and announced in the first week of May. This winner will receive 
the following prizes:

Instead of a regular contributing talk, the winner will present their 
essay during a longer, public â?~Award Lectureâ?T (at some point during 
the conference) Travel reimbursement (up to 300â,¬) + hotel room

Please note that once shortlisted you are guaranteed to speak at the 
Conference (either as a regular contributing speaker, or, in case of the 
winner, as the Award-winning Public Speaker).

Description

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.



Invited Speakers

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)
Richard Dawid, Stockholms Universitet (Sweden)
Johannes Lenhard, Universität Bielefeld (Germany)

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



Organization

This workshop is organized by the DFG and FWF-funded research unit 
"Epistemology of the LHC 
<https://www.lhc-epistemologie.uni-wuppertal.de/home.html>".

 	Cristin Chall (University of Bonn)
 	Dennis Lehmkuhl (University of Bonn)
 	Niels Martens (RWTH Aachen)
 	Martina Merz (University of Klagenfurt)
 	Miguel Ã?ngel 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-wuppertal.de 
<mailto:lhc.epistemology@uni-wuppertal.de>
--
[LOGIC] mailing list
http://www.dvmlg.de/mailingliste.html
Archive: http://www.illc.uva.nl/LogicList/

provided by a collaboration of the DVMLG, the Maths Departments in Bonn and Hamburg, and the ILLC at the Universiteit van Amsterdam