LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for ISHPSB-L Archives


ISHPSB-L Archives

ISHPSB-L Archives


ISHPSB-L@LISTS.UMN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ISHPSB-L Home

ISHPSB-L Home

ISHPSB-L  February 2001

ISHPSB-L February 2001

Subject:

FW: International Conference: Science and Democracy

From:

Chris Young <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Intl Soc for the Hist Phil and Soc St of Biol <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 1 Feb 2001 08:01:03 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (172 lines)

From: Carmine Colacino <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: International Conference: Science and Democracy
Date: Thu, Feb 1, 2001, 7:52 AM


Dear Colleagues,

Contributions will be considered also after the deadline (31 Jan. 2001).
This is why I am sending this announcement to you.
Contributions may be sent directly via e-mail at the address indicated below
(not to me).
For more information check the web site at:

http://www.unibas.it/utenti/ogdc/scidem.html

Best regards.

C. Colacino

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNOUNCEMENT

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici, Napoli


International Conference

SCIENZA E DEMOCRAZIA - SCIENCE AND DEMOCRACY

Napoli, April 20-21, 2001
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Papers
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scientific Committee
F. Attena, E. Caccese, M. Mamone Capria

Cooperation
C. Colacino

Secretariat:
Address: Dipartimento di Matematica
Università - 06123 Perugia
Tel.: 39.75.5855006
Fax: 39.75.5855024
E-mail: [log in to unmask]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction


The aim of this conference is to re-open the debate on a theme whose
relevance for everybody¹s life - and not only intellectual life - is by far
superior to the theoretical and analytical effort spent on it today.
The question of the democratic control on science, forcefully relaunched by
the epistemologist Paul K. Feyerabend in the Seventies, is on the whole
repressed in the present cultural atmosphere, partly because of automatic
associations with notorious incidents of political stymying of research,
like the Galileo and Lysenko affairs. However, it would be difficult to
interpret these historical events in terms of a supposedly overpowering
public opinion, since in fact the latter at most echoed decisions and
condemnations made 'with closed doors', in the usual seats of power
(cultural and not).
More recently, instead, in Western democracies currents of opinion have
developed - expressing themselves through public initiatives of individuals
and groups - mainly related to concerns over health, environment, and the
integrity of the human person: they have been occasioned, for instance, by
the introduction of new systems of energy production and agriculture;
technologies which are already in our dayly life (electric lines, portable
phones); the legal definition of new scientific criteria of Œlife¹ and
Œdeath¹; the absence or insufficience of official recognition of alternative
medicines etc. That at present the relationship between citiziens and
scientists - who often act as Œexperts¹ and consultants for political
representatives - is not balanced enough to permit a genuine dialogue, is
shown, on one hand, by the frequent appeals signed by Œexperts¹ and inviting
fellow-citizens to free themselves from a supposedly endemic "scientific
illiteracy", and on the other hand by the growing distrust of citizens
towards the scientific community, suspected of collusion with powerful
vested interests.
It is clear that trying to dissolve the problem by confining the decisive
discussions within privileged circles and pouring propaganda on anybody
else, will have the only effect of widening the gap between scientists on
one side, and the civil society supporting them and guaranteeing them a
public role on the other. Therefore it is important to study how a space for
substantial cognitive exchange can be created, equally distant from the
refusal to be informed (rather rare) and attempts at indoctrination (far
more frequent). An instance of the second kind is the identification - made
to discredit lay criticism - between rejection of one technology, with
rejection of the whole of technology, or indeed, science.
But in order to solve the problem of the democratic control over scientific
research, another problem has to be tackled first which is rarely thought of
as connected to it, namely, that of the internal politics of the scientific
communities. Although scientific knowledge ambitions to be free of political
and ideological biases, it is a fact that it is a profoundly Œsocial¹
knowledge: it is produced by hierachically organized groups, which evaluate,
award, and punish their own members, control in various fashions what
opinions can be held or even just discussed in a public setting, and so on.
This dimension of science has been for a too long time ignored by
epistemologists and historians, but a new generation of scholars has started
in the last two decades to offer interesting reconstructions of the social
context of research, thus giving back to it that character of human activity
which had been essentially erased in standard treatments. And as it is the
case for state politics, the internal politics of the scientific communities
cannot be understood if one neglects their Œforeign politics¹, that is, the
relationship with society - political institutions, economic powers, media
etc.; conversely, this relationship depends to a large extent on the
aspirations of the communities, first of all the necessity of financial
support for research projects which are more and more costly, and laden with
social consequences which are at least in need of being seriously debated.
Thus science is a meeting point, and sometimes a collision point, between
demands of reassurance and problem solving, by the society at large, and
group or individual aspirations, by its practitioners. For this reason, to
analyse correctly the nexus between science and democracy there is need of
different viewpoints and data, and the cooperation of different competences
and experiences.

The conference aims at investigating these two main areas in their different
aspects, welcoming both theoretical elaborations and documented case
studies. There will be two days, organized as follows:

I. DEMOCRACY IN SCIENCE

- The sociology of scientific communities
- The making of a scientist, between method and specialism
- Communication and reception of scientific results
- Controversies in science
- The judgement of the peers: research projects, papers, careers
- Dissidence and emargination in science

II. SCIENCE IN A DEMOCRACY

- Public and private funds in scientific research
- Technological applications and social consent
- ŒExperts¹ and Œlaymen¹ in public debates
- Teaching, popularizing, informing
- Scientific rationality and its critics
- Assessing science without being a scientist

Participation

Participation is free. Participants are invited to send their contributions,
in a complete version, by 31 January, 2001, to the address cited above;
length should be of 10-15 pages in A4 format, 12 points; it is warmly
advised to send (by e-mail or diskette) the corresponding file, compiled
with Word for Windows or with any other word processor which can be
translated into it. All accepted contributions will be posted into the
website of the conference. For this reason, even those interested people who
may not be sure to be present at the conference are advised to send their
contributions anyway. Italian and English are the preferred languages, but
contributions in other (preferably neo-Latin) languages will also be
considered.
Because of limits in time, not all accepted contributions will be presented
orally at the conference. Every participant will be informed within one
month after the arrival of the paper whether it has been accepted or not,
and, by February 28, 2001, whether it has been selected for the oral
presentation.
A volume of proceedings, containing a selection of the accepted
contributions, is planned.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Dr Carmine Colacino - [log in to unmask]
Herbarium Lucanum [HLUC] & Dept. of Biology
University of Basilicata. 85100 Potenza, Southern Italy
Tel. +39 0971205743; Fax +39 0971205742
http://www.unibas.it/utenti/colacino/mediterraneo.html

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
November 2020
October 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
April 2017
March 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
January 2015
December 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
October 2013
September 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
August 2012
July 2012
March 2012
January 2012
December 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
August 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
April 2006
March 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
July 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.UMN.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager