News & Agenda 2014-2015

Omdat de hoofdspreker van het aankomende seminar zich heeft teruggetrokken, zijn wij helaas genoodzaakt onderstaande bijeenkomst te annuleren.

STEVIN SEMINAR #9

* * *

Vidi Beurs voor Lid Stevin Centrum, de Filosoof Jeroen de Ridder

Democratie wijzer

De filosoof Jeroen de Ridder gaat onderzoeken of liberale democratieën goed zijn in het produceren van kennis. Hij gaat met zijn collega’s na hoe vrij en open debat tussen diverse standpunten idealiter zou moeten leiden tot kennis. Vervolgens onderzoeken ze of dit ideaal stand kan houden wanneer je verdisconteert dat burgers diepgaande meningsverschillen hebben en slechts beperkt rationeel zijn.

Next Stevin Centre Symposium

(in Dutch) organized together with the

Platform of the History of Humanities and Sciences (HHS) of the University of Amsterdam:

10 juni, 2015. 15:30 – 17:00 uur.

Zaal: VU, WN (Wis-en Natuurkundegebouw) S 631

Rond het boek van

David Baneke: De Ontdekkers van de Hemel.

Meer informatie later.

INVITATION

Ad hoc-ness: a historico-philosophical analysis

LECTURE by Samuel Schindler (Aarhus University, Denmark)

COMMENTARIES by Kelvin McQueen and Henk de Regt (VU Amsterdam)

13 May 2015, 15.00-17.00 hrs.

VU Main Building, De Boelelaan 1015, Room 05A-02

Afterwards drinks in The Basket

Organized by

Stevin Centre for the History of Science and Humanities

& Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, VU Amsterdam

ABSTRACT

What do scientists precisely mean when they level ad hoc charges against a hypothesis or a theory? Although an answer to this question appears to be straightforward at first sight, a closer look at various historical cases reveals the need for a more thorough analysis. In this talk I will review some of the extant proposals and present my own account of the meaning of ad hoc-ness. In the process, I will discuss not only standard examples of ad hoc hypotheses, such as the Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction hypothesis and epicycles in Ptolemaic astronomy, but also more recent ones such as the Higgs mechanism and aspects of the cosmological debate between steady state and big bang theorists in the 1950s-60s.

Samuel Schindler is Associate Professor at the Centre for Science Studies, Aarhus University, Denmark. http://www.samuelschindler.org/

Kelvin McQueen is Postdoctoral Researcher at the Department of Philosophy, VU University Amsterdam. http://kelvinmcqueen.com/

Henk de Regt is Professor at the Department of Philosophy, VU University Amsterdam. https://vu-nl.academia.edu/HenkdeRegt

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

This meeting has been cancelled because of the illness of the speaker.

STEVIN CENTRE SEMINAR ON APRIL 8, 2015

Date : 8 April 2015

Time: 16:00 – 17:15 hr

Room: WN-S631

Spreker: Wouter Goris (Department of Philosophy, VU University Amsterdam)

Afterwards drinks in the Basket

‘Our’ Common Knowledge. Epistemic Constellations and the A priori in the Early Stoa, in Arabic Philosophy, and in Medieval Latin Philosophy.

If Kant, in a famous passage in the first Critique (A166-7), refers to Epicurus to connect his anticipation of perception with the latter’s notion of prolēpsis, this prolēpsis, meanwhile comfortably embedded in the opposition between the empirical and the transcendental, is defined in contradistinction to one of its main characteristics in Epicureanism and the Early Stoa: its empirical character. Between Epicurus and Kant, the history of the a priori is enacted. In this contribution, we present some stages of this history. Instead of analyzing a continuity, however, we set out to describe the way different epistemic constellations put into operation like formal structures. In the Early Stoa, in Arabic Philosophy, and in Medieval Latin Philosophy, we encounter the idea of natural conceptions common to all mankind. In each of these traditions, this idea is put forward to provide an answer to the Meno-paradox. And in each of these traditions, finally, we can observe a specific tension between the empirical and the transcendental dimensions of these natural conceptions. Judged from the history of philosophy, we are confronted here with the question of reason, the inalienable associate of human nature, and the need to allow for anthropological constants. Judged from the variety of epistemic constellation, however, the question is rather how these discourses create the illusion of continuity.

Wouter Goris is professor of the history of ancient, patristic and medieval philosophy at the VU University

STEVIN CENTRE SEMINAR ON MARCH 4, 2015

SEMINAR van het Stevin Centre for History of Science and Humanities

Spreker: Gijsbert van den Brink (VU Faculteit der Godgeleerdheid)

Datum and tijd: 4 Maart 2015, 16.00-17.15 hr.

Locatie: VU Science Building, De Boelelaan 1085, Zaal F 612

Daarna borrel in The Basket

Kuyper en Warfield over evolutie

Het werk van VU-oprichter Abraham Kuyper beleeft momenteel een ware revival in de Verenigde Staten. Met name door evangelicale theologen wordt Kuypers hulp en autoriteit ingeroepen voor de oplossing van zeer uiteenlopende hedendaagse samenlevingsvragen. De vraag is nu of Kuyper ook zou kunnen helpen bij het overbruggen van de vaak grote kloof tussen geloof en wetenschap, tussen old time religion en academie? Om hier een antwoord op te vinden, herlezen we de rectorale rede over Evolutie die Kuyper op de VU hield in oktober 1899. Dat was één jaar nadat hij te Princeton zijn fameuze Stone-lectures had gehouden, op uitnodiging van zijn gastheer en collega daar: Benjamin B. Warfield. Mijn hypothese is nu dat Kuyper in zijn rede weliswaar op retorisch fraaie en inhoudelijk goed geïnformeerde wijze het evolutiedenken kritiseert, maar op het beslissend punt invloed vertoont van Warfields veel opener benadering van de evolutietheorie. Recent onderzoek van David Livingstone e.a. heeft laten zien dat de reacties van religieuze gemeenschappen op Darwins evolutietheorie sterk gekleurd werden door ‘the particulars of place’. In deze lezing zal dit nagegaan worden met betrekking tot Amsterdam en Princeton – Kuyper en Warfield. 

Gijsbert van den Brink is URC-hoogleraar Theologie en wetenschap aan de Faculteit der Godgeleerdheid.

All interested people welcome!

NEXT STEVIN MEETINGs

April 8: Lecture from the Group of Historical Philosophy, Room WN S 631

May13 : Samuel Schindler (Aarhus University): (15-17 uur), in cooperation with Department of Philosphy, Room HG 05A02

June 10: WN S 631

More information later.

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF STEVIN CENTRE SEMINAR ON FEBRUARY 4, AND OF GLOBAL HISTORY SEMINAR ON FEBRUARY 26, 2015

THE GLOBAL HISTORY SEMINAR HAS BEEN CANCELLED

MEETING of the Stevin Centre for History of Science and Humanities

Speaker: Niels de Bruijn (VU Faculty of Law)

Date and time: 4 February 2015, 16.00-17.15 hr.

Location: VU Science Building, De Boelelaan 1085, Room F 612

Afterwards drinks in The Basket

Theologians and Recalcitrant Horses. How Early-Modern Scholasticism Shaped 16th-Century Castilian Sales Law

In the year 1571, Antonio de la Vega Sanz, proudly seated on his recently acquired horse, rode toward Toledos' plaza mayor to royally entertain Queen Anna of Austria. However, to Sanz' dismay, his latest purchase 'made a lot of trouble and kicked him twice and it was necessary for him to leave the said square for all the hubbub he caused on it', so a witness later told. After this embarrassing scene, Sanz channeled his frustrations into a suit against Pedro de Hortiz and his son who had sold him the indomitable horse and claimed compensation for all the damages he had incurred. This case is one of many about a defect in a thing bought which made it to the Royal Chancery of Valladolid, Castilian's highest appellate court at the time, and which can still be consulted today in the Chancery's archives. Yet, the files of these lawsuits do not inform us about the legal sources which were used to come to a decision. Discussing 16th-century books on Castilian legal doctrine, theological treatises and case law of the Royal Chancery, this presentation attempts to illustrate by which principles and norms Castilian legal scholars and practitioners led themselves be guided in their pleas and judgments in cases such as Sanz'. Particular attention will be paid to the role early-modern scholastics played in the treatment of such down-to-earth issues as sales of recalcitrant horses.

Niels de Bruijn is a Ph.D-Candidate in Legal History at the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam

All interested people welcome!

NEXT STEVIN MEETINGS

March 4: Gijsbert van den Brink (History of Theology). The meeting will be preceded by a Stevin Member Consultation Meeting from 15:00 to 15:50 hr.

April 8: Lecture from the Group of Historical Philosophy.

More information later.

THE GLOBAL HISTORY SEMINAR HAS BEEN CANCELLED

SEMINAR GLOBAL HISTORY

About Social Darwinism and Chinese Eugenics

Speaker: Juliette Chung (National Tsing Hua University, Institute of History)

Date and Time: VU February 26, 2015; 15:00 hr.

Location: Main Building VU, 9a05

Better Science and Better Race

This lecture explores the variegated roles played by racial, eugenic, and Social Darwinist discourse in China over roughly the last century. Using Japan as a parallel for comparison, it analyzes the introduction of the term “eugenics” into Japanese and Chinese. It then locates the deployment of eugenics and Social Darwinism as counterimperial discourse in East Asia. It offers a brief history of eugenics thinking in China across the twentieth century, focusing on the Chinese eugenicist Pan Guangdan, who used race as a category of analysis yet without any sense of hierarchy. He was critically aware of the scientific basis of eugenics and helped craft the study of eugenics in China, from biology to sociology, from economics to ethnology.

MEETING of the Stevin Centre for History of Science and Humanities

Speaker: Fenneke Sysling

Date and time: 3 December 2014, 16.00-17.15 uur

Location: Science Building, VU, De Boelelaan 1085, Room G 076

Afterwards drinks in The Basket

Self-knowledge through numbers. Self-instructors in phrenology as self-tracking technologies, 1850-1900

Today it has become popular to use digital technology to acquire data on daily life: on sleep patterns, calorie intake or the number of steps taken for example. These data are supposed to give people a more accurate and objective sense of themselves which can help implement changes, for example to live a healthier life. The technologies to make this possible are revolutionary but the use of quantification to study and understand the individual body is not new. This paper looks at the late nineteenth century example of phrenology. Phrenologists believed that the human mind could be categorized in different mental faculties, with each particular faculty represented in a different area of the brain. On the head the development of these areas could be studied by analyzing the bumps. These bumps however were not only studied by (semi-)professional phrenologists but also by individuals who applied phrenology to themselves and to others, mostly in the U.S. and England. This paper shows how with the help of phrenological ‘Self-Instructors’ individuals in this historical period too transformed their own self-understanding and worked towards self-improvement by engaging with techniques of quantification.

Fenneke Sysling is a lecturer at VU University, specialized in the history of science, race and colonialism. She wrote her PhD thesis on the history of physical anthropology in the Netherlands Indies.

All interested people wellcome!

MEETING of the Stevin Centre for History of Science and Humanities

Speaker: Azadeh Achbari

Date and time: 5 November 2014, 16.00-17.15 uur

Location: Science Building, VU, De Boelelaan 1085, Room G 076

Afterwards drinks in The Basket

Troubled Waters, Clearing Skies: boundary disputes and the struggle for authority in 19th-century meteorology

Understanding weather conditions on land and at sea became a matter of prime concern and gained increasing relevance in the 19th-century globalizing world of colonial expansion and maritime trade. As the weather knew no boundaries, neither national, nor between land and sea, knowing its phenomena was a shared interest. Despite an increasing awareness of the need for international cooperation, however, 19th-century meteorology was a highly contested field. Naval officers and academic men of science struggled for authority in the emerging science. Practical concerns clashed with scientific ambitions when the primacy of marine or land-based observations was discussed. The growing practice of weather forecasts and storm warnings added a new dimension to the dispute as their scientific basis was severely questioned by academic elites. Meteorological theories abounded, but who was to be trusted as an expert? What meteorological standards should be met? While the British Royal Society sought to bend these issues to suit its concerns, it was the Dutch professor Buys Ballot who, mainly through his networking abilities, got the upper hand in most of these battles. In 1868 his rule of thumb was transformed into a universal law of nature, internationally referred to as "Buys Ballot’s Law". Five years later his leading position was manifest in his appointment as president of the international meteorological conference held in Vienna.

Azadeh Achbari is a PhD student at the VU University Amsterdam. She has a Master Degree in European Studies of the University of Amsterdam. Her research was funded by NWO and Fulbright.

All interested people wellcome!