Center for Logic, Language, and Cognition
The Fifth Reasoning Club Conference will take place at the Center for Logic, Language, and Cognition in Turin on 18-19 May, 2017.
The Reasoning Club is a network of institutes, centres, departments, and groups addressing research topics connected to reasoning, inference, and methodology broadly construed. It issues the monthly gazette The Reasoner. (Earlier editions of the meeting were held in Brussels, Pisa, Kent, and Manchester.)
THURSDAY, 18 MAY
Palazzo Badini
via Verdi 10, Torino
Sala Lauree di Psicologia (ground floor)
9:00 | welcome and coffee
9:30 | greetings and presentation of the new editorship of The Reasoner (Hykel HOSNI, Milan)
Morning session – chair: Gustavo CEVOLANI (IMT Lucca)
10:00 | invited talk
Branden FITELSON (Northeastern University, Boston)
Two approaches to belief revision
In this paper, we compare and contrast two methods for the qualitative revision of (viz., full) beliefs. The first (Bayesian) method is generated by a simplistic diachronic Lockean thesis requiring coherence with the agent's posterior credences after conditionalization. The second (Logical) method is the orthodox AGM approach to belief revision. Our primary aim will be to characterize the ways in which these two approaches can disagree with each other — especially in the special case where the agent's belief set is deductively cogent.
(joint work with Ted Shear and Jonathan Weisberg)
11:00 | Ted SHEAR (Queensland) and John QUIGGIN (Queensland)
A modal logic for reasonable belief
11:45 | Nina POTH (Edinburgh) and Peter BRÖSSEL (Bochum)
Bayesian inferences and conceptual spaces: Solving the complex-first paradox
12:30 | lunch break
Afternoon session I – chair: Peter BRÖSSEL (Bochum)
13:30 | invited talk
Katya TENTORI (University of Trento)
Judging forecasting accuracy: How human intuitions can help improving formal models
Most of the scoring rules that have been discussed and defended in the literature are not ordinally equivalent, with the consequence that, after the very same outcome has materialized, a forecast X can be evaluated as more accurate than Y according to one model but less accurate according to another. A question that naturally arises is therefore which of these models better captures people’s intuitive assessment of forecasting accuracy. To answer this question, we developed a new experimental paradigm for eliciting ordinal judgments of accuracy concerning pairs of forecasts for which various combinations of associations/dissociations between the Quadratic, Logarithmic, and Spherical scoring rules are obtained. We found that, overall, the Logarithmic model is the best predictor of people’s accuracy judgments, but also that there are cases in which these judgments — although they are normatively sound — systematically depart from what is expected by all the models. These results represent an empirical evaluation of the descriptive adequacy of the three most popular scoring rules and offer insights for the development of new formal models that might favour a more natural elicitation of truthful and informative beliefs from human forecasters.
(joint work with Vincenzo Crupi and Andrea Passerini)
14:30 | Catharine SAINT-CROIX (Michigan)
Immodesty and evaluative uncertainty
15:15 | Michael SCHIPPERS (Oldenburg) and Jakob KOSCHOLKE (Hamburg)
Against relative overlap measures of coherence
16:00 | coffee break
Afternoon session II – chair: Paolo MAFFEZIOLI (Torino)
16:30 | Simon HEWITT (Leeds)
Frege's theorem in plural logic
17:15 | Lorenzo ROSSI (Salzburg) and Julien MURZI (Salzburg)
Generalized Revenge
20:00 | social dinner
FRIDAY, 19 MAY
Campus Luigi Einaudi
Lungo Dora Siena 100/A
Sala Lauree Rossa
building D1 (ground floor)
9:00 | welcome and coffee
Morning session – chair: Jan SPRENGER (Tilburg)
9:30 | invited talk
Paul EGRÉ (Institut Jean Nicod, Paris)
Logical consequence and ordinary reasoning
The notion of logical consequence has been approached from a variety of angles. Tarski famously proposed a semantic characterization (in terms of truth-preservation), but also a structural characterization (in terms of axiomatic properties including reflexivity, transitivity, monotonicity, and other features). In recent work, E. Chemla, B. Spector and I have proposed a characterization of a wider class of consequence relations than Tarskian relations, which we call "respectable" (JLC, forthcoming). The class also includes non-reflexive and nontransitive relations, which can be motivated in relation to ordinary reasoning (such as reasoning with vague predicates, see Zardini 2008, Cobreros et al. 2012, or reasoning with presuppositions, see Strawson 1952, von Fintel 1998, Sharvit 2016). Chemla et al.'s characterization is partly structural, and partly semantic, however. In this talk I will present further advances toward a purely structural characterization of such respectable consequence relations. I will discuss the significance of this research program toward bringing logic closer to ordinary reasoning.
(joint work with Emmanuel Chemla and Benjamin Spector)
10:30 | Niels SKOVGAARD-OLSEN (Freiburg)
Conditionals and multiple norm conflicts
11:15 | Luis ROSA (Munich)
Knowledge grounded on pure reasoning
12:00 | lunch break
Afternoon session I – chair: Steven HALES (Bloomsburg)
13:30 | invited talk
Leah HENDERSON (University of Groningen)
The unity of explanatory virtues
Scientific theory choice is often characterised as an Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) in which a number of distinct explanatory virtues are combined and traded off against one another. Furthermore, the epistemic significance of each explanatory virtue is often seen as highly case-specific. But are there really so many dimensions to theory choice? By considering how IBE may be situated in a Bayesian framework, I propose a more unified picture of the virtues in scientific theory choice.
14:30 | Benjamin EVA (Munich) and Reuben STERN (Munich)
Causal explanatory power
15:15 | coffee break
Afternoon session II – chair: Jakob KOSCHOLKE (Hamburg)
16:00 | Barbara OSIMANI (Munich)
Bias, random error, and the variety of evidence thesis
16:45 | Felipe ROMERO (Tilburg) and Jan SPRENGER (Tilburg)
Scientific self-correction: The Bayesian way
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE: Gustavo Cevolani (Torino), Vincenzo Crupi (Torino), Jason Konek (Kent), Paolo Maffezioli (Torino).
For any queries please contact Vincenzo Crupi (vincenzo.crupi@unito.it(link sends e-mail)) or Jason Konek (jpkonek@ksu.edu(link sends e-mail)).
h 17-19
Palazzo del Rettorato, Loggione del primo piano
via Verdi 8, Torino
LIST OF CONTRIBUTIONS
Cristina AMORETTI, Marcello FRIXIONE, Antonio LIETO
What kind of concept is DISEASE? What cognitive science can say to philosophy of medicine about concepts
The issue of defining the concept of DISEASE is much discussed in philosophy of medicine. Diverse as they are, disease definitions offer a classical view of the concept of DISEASE. However, as none of them is entirely satisfactory, some scholars have proposed to regard the concept of DISEASE as a non-classical one. In this work, we won’t take side in favour of either a classical or a non-classical approach, but critically evaluate the most relevant attempts to characterize the concept of DISEASE in non-classical terms, showing some of their limits and misunderstandings.
Guido BONINO, Paolo TRIPODI
Distant reading in the history of philosophy: Wittgenstein and academic success
Si tratta di un tentativo di applicare le tecniche del distant reading, introdotte e usate da Franco Moretti in storia della letteratura, alla storia della filosofia. In particolare, allo scopo di indagare alcuni aspetti del “declino” della tradizione wittgensteiniana nella filosofia anglo-americana contemporanea, abbiamo analizzato il corpus dei metadati delle tesi di dottorato in filosofia discusse nelle università statunitensi tra il 1980 e il 2010, e abbiamo osservato e interpretato una correlazione interessante tra il successo accademico di un dottore di ricerca in filosofia e il tema di cui la tesi tratta (in particolare, abbiamo registrato e discusso il fatto che occuparsi di Wittgenstein sembri essere decisamente meno conveniente, in vista della carriera accademica, dell'occuparsi di filosofi analitici come Kripke, Lewis, Fodor o Dummett).
Cristina BOSCO, Delia IRAZÚ HERNÁNDEZ FARÍAS, Mirko LAI, Viviana PATTI, Giancarlo RUFFO, Manuela SANGUINETTI, Emilio SULIS
Odi et Amo in Twitter: Anatomy and geography of happiness and hate
Per rilevare l’orientamento politico o per cogliere il grado di benessere percepito dalle persone, sono spesso applicate tecniche automatiche di rilevazione di opinioni e sentimenti (opinion mining e sentiment analysis) soprattutto ai testi che vengono quotidianamente prodotti in grande quantità dagli utenti sui social media. Lo stesso tipo di tecnologie viene utilizzato per rilevare, analizzare e monitorare contenuti di odio e ostilità (ad esempio messaggi omofobi e razzisti) che sono spesso veicolati dalla rete. In questi contesti è frequente l’uso di linguaggio figurato, in particolare dell’ironia, fenomeno importante da riconoscere per una corretta identificazione delle opinioni e dei sentimenti espressi nei testi. Il poster day è un occasione per condividere l'informazione sulle attività del gruppo su questi temi, anche in relazione ai progetti recentemente finanziati da Fondazione CRT (Hate speech e social media) e Compagnia di San Paolo (IhatePrejudice: Immigrants, hate, and prejudice in social media).
Fabrizio CALZAVARINI, Diego MARCONI
The empirical status of the pictorial view of meaning: A critical review
Advocates of the pictorial theory of meaning claimed that meaning of a word is a mental picture, and lexical semantic competence is closely connected to visual imagery. As a semantic theory, the pictorial theory was discredited in the 20th century. Nevertheless, there is evidence that visual imagery does play a role in semantic processing and is not just a possible side effect of it. High imageable [IMG] words (banana, smile, chair), as opposed to low IMG words (deduction, event, democracy) appear to facilitate several tasks related to semantic processing. Moreover, high IMG words turn out to selectively activate visual-related areas in the human cortex, to the difference of low IMG words. At least prima facie, such data could be seen as decisively vindicating the pictorial view of meaning, as far as high IMG words are concerned. In this work, we provide a critical review of the empirical data supporting the pictorial view of meaning. Our analysis suggests a word of caution. First, we are going to claim that the existing neuroimaging studies supporting the pictorial view of meaning are affected by some potential confounds and inconsistencies. Secondly, we will claim that neuropsychological data, i.e. data from patients with brain insults, do not conclusively demonstrate that visual imagery is a necessary component of semantic processing of high IMG words. Thirdly, we will claim that research on congenitally blind speakers might suggest that, in both the sighted and the blind, the facilitating factor in language understanding is not strictly visual.
Gustavo CEVOLANI
Rationality as truth approximation
I explore a new approach to the analysis of rational fallible belief based on the notion of truthlikeness (also known as verisimilitude). The central idea is that truth is the aim of inquiry, and that one should rationally belief X just in case X is estimated as close to the truth in a suitably defined sense. I study how this approach deals with well-known difficulties like the Lottery and Preface paradoxes, and how it compares with probabilism and the Lockean thesis.
Davide COLLA, Enrico MENSA, Daniele RADICIONI
Semantic keywords extraction and search for documents browsing
In questo lavoro presentiamo un sistema che permette di effettuare ricerche all’interno di una collezione di documenti testuali utilizzando un approccio semantico, basato cioè non sulla frequenza di termini ma sull’individuazione di concetti salienti sia all’interno dei documenti della collezione, sia all’interno della interrogazione inviata dall’utente. Il sistema è stato progettato per effettuare ricerche fra i documenti presentati nel corso dell’Hackathon HU4A (hackUniTO for Ageing), durante il quale sono stati raccolti 283 progetti di ricerca appartenenti a differenti ambiti disciplinari e focalizzati sul tema dell’ageing, su cui il sistema sarà testato.
Francesca GARBARINI, Fabrizio CALZAVARINI, Matteo DIANO, Monica BIGGIO, Carola BARBERO, Katiuscia SACCO, Daniele RADICIONI, Diego MARCONI
Lexical semantic competence and visual imagery: An fMRI study
Lexical competence, i.e. the ability to use words, includes both the ability to relate words to the external world as accessed through perception (referential tasks) and the ability to relate words to other words in inferential tasks of several kinds (Marconi, 1997). There is evidence from both traditional neuropsychology and more recent neuroimaging research that the two aspects of lexical competence may be implemented by partly different brain regions. However, some very recent experiments appear to show that typically visual areas are also engaged by purely inferential tasks, not involving visual perception of objects or pictures (Marconi et al., 2013). In the present study we investigate the role of visual imagery in lexical inferential tasks.
Anna GOY, Diego MAGRO, Marco ROVERA
Ontologies and historical archives: A way to tell new stories
The poster describes the ongoing activities within the Harlock'900 and PRiSMHA projects. Both projects aim at demonstrating how a rich semantic representation of the content of historical archival resources (a "semantic layer") can enhance the access and thus the possibilities of their exploitation. The semantic layer is based on a formal representation (relying on computational ontologies and established standards), supporting the detailed representation of historical events, including their location, temporal information, how the involved entities participate, and relations among events. Knowledge acquisition is supported by a crowdsourcing collaborative model, coupled with techniques for automatic information extraction from texts. The output is provided both through a final user interface and a set of APIs.
Jakob KOSCHOLKE
A weak symmetry condition for probabilistic measures of confirmation
We present a symmetry condition for probabilistic measures of confirmation which agrees with Eells and Fitelson's (2002) negated commutativity symmetry condition but is weaker than Crupi et al.'s (2007) disconfirmation symmetry condition. It is based on the idea that for any value a probabilistic measure of confirmation can assign there is a corresponding case where degrees of confirmation are symmetric. It turns out that a number of prominent measures of confirmation do not satisfy this condition and instead exhibit a rather odd behaviour in certain cases of disconfirmation. As we point out, this result also has important implications for probabilistic measures of information change, causal strength, explanatory power and coherence.
Enrico MENSA, Daniele RADICIONI, Antonio LIETO
COVER: A vectorial resource for computing conceptual similarity
In questo lavoro presentiamo una risorsa linguistica ad ampia copertura, COVER, che contiene i sensi più rilevanti per i 17K termini più frequenti del dizionario inglese. Si tratta di una risorsa vettoriale, sviluppata per combinare conoscenza di tipo enciclopedico e conoscenza di senso comune. I sensi presenti in COVER sono ancorati a un sistema di riferimento concettuale uniforme, basato su una risorsa linguistica esistente di nome BabelNet. Abbiamo valutato questa risorsa all’interno di una competizione internazionale sul task di somiglianza concettuale (dati due termini si tratta di stimare quanto siano simili; valori confrontati con i giudizi forniti da esseri umani). Abbiamo ottenuto risultati interessanti, che ci hanno permesso di migliorare ulteriormente la risorsa.
Luca ROVERSI, Gianluca CURZI
Linear logic and computation
Il poster vuole sintetizzare alcuni sviluppi della logica lineare, ponendo un forte accento sul modo in cui essa abbia contribuito a gettare luce sulla nozione di computazione sotto diversi punti di vista. Vengono considerati quindi alcuni temi "caldi" della ricerca in computer science, come la complessità computazionale, la geometria della computazione, la teoria della concorrenza, le semantiche denotazionali e categoriali, e infine la proof-search.
Katya TENTORI, Andrea PASSERINI, Vincenzo CRUPI
Judging forecasting accuracy: Human intuition vs. formal models
We developed a new experimental paradigm for eliciting ordinal judgments of accuracy concerning pairs of forecasts for which various combinations of associations/dissociations between the Quadratic, Logarithmic, and Spherical scoring rules are obtained. Overall, the Logarithmic model is the best predictor of people’s accuracy judgments, but there are cases in which these judgments — although normatively acceptable — systematically depart from what is expected by all models. These results represent an empirical evaluation of the descriptive adequacy of the three most popular scoring rules and offer insights for the development of new formal models that might favour a more natural elicitation of truthful and informative beliefs from human forecasters.
Pietro TERNA
SLAPP: Swarm-like agent-based protocol in Python
SLAPP is an agent-based general purpose shell in Python; it derives by the original Santa Fe project named Swarm. SLAPP is open source and fully documented at https://github.com/terna/SLAPP/
Marco VIOLA
Function-structure mapping in cognitive neuroscience
Cognitive neuroscience seeks to provide an integrated account of mind (i.e. the ensemble of all possible cognitive processes) and brain. However, there are several ways and several levels of abstraction to describe cognitive functions and brain structures, as well as many ways to conceive their relation. According to Price and Friston (2005), cognitive neuroscience should privilege taxonomies at the level that allows structures to predict functions, and vice versa, so to achieve a perfect one-to-one mapping. However, the relation between structures and functions according to our current theories is virtually always a many-to-many structures. This leaves us with two options: (1) to give up the goal of achieving one-to-one mapping; (2) to make radical or slight revisions to either the neural or the mental ontology (or both) in order to preserve the one-to-one mapping.
Il 12 giugno 2017 si è svolta presso il Circolo dei Lettori di Torino una giornata di studi dedicata a Diego Marconi.
NON SO SE MI SPIEGO
Giornata di studi dedicata a Diego Marconi
La giornata in onore dei settant’anni di Diego Marconi, professore ordinario di Filosofia del linguaggio dell’Università di Torino, è suddivisa in sei sezioni che ne ripercorrono il percorso di studio e ricerca: la dialettica, il pensiero di L. Wittgenstein, il rapporto tra filosofia e interpretazione, la competenza lessicale, la verità e la distinzione tra la filosofia di stampo analitico e quella di matrice continentale.
TEMI E INTERVENTI
Introduzione
Alberto VOLTOLINI (Torino)
Alfredo PATERNOSTER (Bergamo)
Marilena ANDRONICO (Ferrara)
video >> https://youtu.be/PCU_nVA-PLQ
Dialettica
Francesco BERTO (Amsterdam)
Andrea IACONA (Torino)
video >> https://youtu.be/JUIOKlnjxFY
Competenza
Stefano CAPPA (Pavia)
Fabrizio CALZAVARINI (Torino)
video >> https://youtu.be/BhNtMcolR9g
Verità
Kevin MULLIGAN (Ginevra)
Stefano CAPUTO (Sassari)
video >> https://youtu.be/XEjD4NSpsAY
Filosofia e interpretazione
Luigi PERISSINOTTO (Venezia)
Paolo TRIPODI (Torino)
video >> https://youtu.be/TFp_S3c0730
Wittgenstein
Pasquala FRASCOLLA (Potenza)
Guido BONINO (Torino)
video >> https://youtu.be/Bv1ZRPtvzY0
Analitici e continentali
Maurizio FERRARIS (Torino)
Carola BARBERO (Torino)
video >> https://youtu.be/5fJlM0_4P6A
Topoi Conference 2018
Foundational Issues in Philosophical Semantics
31 May – 1 June
Sala Lauree Psicologia
Palazzo Badini (ground floor)
via Verdi 10, Torino
Topoi is an international journal of philosophy based in Rome, Italy (http://www.springer.com/philosophy/journal/11245). Every other year, Topoi funds a conference in a different city, that purports to focus on foundational issues in some subfield of analytic philosophy. Previous Topoi conferences were Rome 2012 (Intentions: Philosophical and Empirical Issues); Oxford 2014 (The Metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics); Munich 2016 (New Trends in Rational Choice Theory). Following the conference, contributions are then selected for publication on Topoi.
In 2018, the Topoi conference will be held at the Center for Logic, Language, and Cognition (LLC) in Turin and will focus on foundational issues in philosophical semantics. The event will take place for 2 days on 31 May - 1 June. It will involve 6 keynote speakers (listed below) as well as several other speakers selected through a call for abstracts.
PROGRAM
THURSDAY, 31 MAY
9:00 | introduction: Fabio PAGLIERI (ISTC – CNR, Editor in chief of TOPOI)
9:15 | chair: Carola BARBERO (University of Turin)
KEYNOTE: Elisabeth CAMP (Rutgers University)
Whence, and wherefore, semantics?
10:15 | Claudia BIANCHI (San Raffaele University, Milan) and Bianca CEPOLLARO (IFILNOVA, Lisbon)
Slurs and conventional non-truth-conditional meaning: A challenge from reclamation
10:55 | coffee break
11:25 | Ricardo MENA (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México)
The bridge principle and stigmatized truth values
12:05 | Kevin RICHARDSON (North Carolina State University)
The philosophical significance of empirical semantics
12:45 | lunch break
14:30 | chair: Andrea IACONA (University of Turin)
KEYNOTE: Frank VELTMAN (ILLC, University of Amsterdam)
Generics and generality
15:30 | Robert VAN ROOIJ and Katrin SCHOLZ (Institute for Logic, Language, and Computation, Amsterdam)
A causal power semantics of generic sentences
16:10 | coffee break
16:40 | Simon GOLDSTEIN (Lingnan University)
Entailment in dynamic semantics
17:20 | chair: Vincenzo CRUPI (University of Turin)
KEYNOTE: Hannes LEITGEB (Ludwig Maximilian University Munich & MCMP)
From communicative belief revision to pragmatic meaning
18:20 | posters and refreshments
FRIDAY, 1 JUNE
9:00 | chair: Jan SPRENGER (University of Turin)
KEYNOTE: Paul PIETROSKI (Rutgers University)
Fostering liars
10:00 | Nissim FRANCEZ (Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa)
Proof-theoretic semantics for natural language
10:40 | coffee break
11:10 | Cosmo GRANT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Mistakes about meaning in signaling games
11:50 | Martin ABREU ZAVALETA (New York University)
Communication and variance
12:30 | lunch break
14:15 | chair: Alberto VOLTOLINI (University of Turin)
KEYNOTE: Francois RECANATI (Paris Institut Jean-Nicod)
Coreference de jure
15:15 | Sarah FISHER (University of Reading)
Truth evaluability in context
15:55 | coffee break
16:25 | Alison HALL (De Montfort University, UK)
Pragmatic enrichment and the underdeterminacy of word meaning
17:05 | chair: Carlotta PAVESE (Duke University / University of Turin)
KEYNOTE: Emma BORG (University of Reading)
How do you solve a problem like implicatures?
18:15 | conclusion
Scientific Committee
Luvell ANDERSON (University of Memphis)
Josh ARMSTRONG (UCLA)
Robert BEDDOR (National University of Singapore)
Stefano CAPUTO (University of Sassari)
Vincenzo CRUPI (University of Turin)
Gabriel GREENBERG (UCLA)
Andrea IACONA (University of Turin)
Karen LEWIS (Columbia University)
Diego MARCONI (University of Turin)
Carlotta PAVESE (Duke University / University of Turin)
William STARR (Cornell University)
Alberto VOLTOLINI (University of Turin)
For additional information, email topoiturin2018@gmail.com(link sends e-mail).
The 2018 Poster Day of the Center for Logic, Language, and Cognition will be held on Friday, 21 September 2018, h 17-19, Palazzo del Rettorato (via Verdi 8, Torino, Loggione del Primo Piano). HERE is a list of the contributions presented.
Fifth Graduate Conference in Mind, Language, and Science of the FINO PhD Program / Midterm Conference of the Italian Society for Analytic Philosophy (SIFA)
FICTION and IMAGINATION as grounds for COUNTERFACTUAL REASONING, SCIENTIFIC MODELING, and THOUGHT EXPERIMENTS
Department of Philosophy and Education Sciences
University of Turin
17-18 June 2019, Turin (Italy)
Keynote speakers
Gregory CURRIE (University of York)
Fred KROON (University of Auckland)
Mauricio SUAREZ (Universidad Complutense de Madrid)
Deena WEISBERG (Villanova University)
In recent times, a huge debate has arisen as to the role of imagination, especially in its relation with fiction, in shaping modal, philosophical, and scientific reasoning. Counterfactual discourse involves the consideration of unreal scenarios, whether possible or even impossible. Both philosophy and science make reference to thought experiments, which seems to be like short fictional stories. And scientific models may be compared with games of make-believe, insofar as the latter mobilize physical objects as props for imaginary characters.
In this conference, we want to primarily address the following topics:
- Does fiction mobilize some specific form of imagination?
- Is there a real divide between fictional and nonfictional works?
- In what sense does imagination support counterfactual reasoning?
- Is practical reasoning counterfactual reasoning?
- Are thought experiments a form of fictional narration?
- Are scientific models really related to pretence play?
What kind of papers?
We invite papers related to the conference themes from PhD students and postdoctoral researchers. Papers should be suitable for 45 minutes presentation, followed by a 15 minutes of general discussion.
We will prioritize papers of high quality and with innovative elements. Submissions from underrepresented groups in philosophy are especially encouraged.
How do I submit?
Please submit an abstract (max. 1000 words, bibliography excluded) by attaching it to a message to the conference organizers Carola Barbero carola.barbero@unito.it(link sends e-mail), Andrea Iacona andrea.iacona@unito.it(link sends e-mail), Alberto Voltolini alberto.voltolini@unito.it(link sends e-mail).
The conference language is English; contributions in other languages will not be considered.
Abstract should be prepared for double-blind review and not contain any identifying information. In case of multiple authors, please indicate in the submission system who is going to present the paper. No conference participant can present more than one paper.
Dates and Deadlines
20 March 2019: Submission Deadline
15 April 2019: Notification of Acceptance
1 June 2019: Registration Deadline
17-18 June 2019: Workshop
Graduate students and early career researchers with precarious appointment may qualify for accommodation at a student residence of the University of Turin. This is subject to availability, though. Choices will be made on the basis of need and priority will be given to participants who present a paper. Please send your request before 1 April 2019 by contacting the organizers.
The 2019 edition of the Formal Epistemology Workshop (FEW2019) will be organized by the Center for Logic, Language, and Cognition (LLC), University of Turin, and take place on 19-21 June 2019.
FEW is an interdisciplinary conference that showcases current research in an array of related areas including epistemology, decision theory, modal logic, foundations of statistics, philosophy of science, and philosophy of language. The event in Turin will be the sixteenth edition of FEW (previous conference pages can be found here).
HERE are all further details about FEW2019.
The 2019 Poster Day of the Center for Logic, Language, and Cognition will be held on Friday, 20 September 2019, h 17-19 (Palazzo del Rettorato, via Verdi 8, Torino, Loggione del Primo Piano). HERE is a list of the contributions presented.
Earlier on in the afternoon (h 15, Sala Principi d'Acaja, same building), the following talk is scheduled.
Felipe ROMERO (University of Groningen)
Social epistemology and the replicability crisis
Replicability is widely taken to ground the epistemic authority of science. However, in recent years, important published findings in the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences have failed to replicate, suggesting that these fields are facing a "replicability crisis". For philosophers, the crisis should not be taken as bad news but as an opportunity to do work on several fronts, including conceptual analysis, history and philosophy of science, research ethics, and social epistemology. This talk shows how recent work on social epistemology can inform debates about replicability, focusing specifically on the reward system of science and the division of cognitive labor.
1 October 2021 from 5:00pm to 6:30pm
10:00-10:15 Vincenzo Crupi and Andrea Iacona, Introduction
10:15-11:15 Hitoshi Omori, Why Connexive Logic?
11:30-12:15 Martina Calderisi, Extended Evidentialism and Connexivity
Lunch Break
14:00-14:45 Guido Gherardi and Eugenio Orlandelli, Super-Strict Implication
15:00-15:45 Claudio Pizzi, Implicative Conditionals, Consequential Conditionals and Necessity Operators
16:00-17:00 Heinrich Wansing, Logical bilateralism and Connexive Logic
Sessismo e anti-sessismo nel linguaggio
PHDS IN LOGIC XIII
5th-7th September, 2022
Turin, Italy
We are pleased to announce that the registration for the PhDs in Logic XIII is now open! (See below for the relevant deadlines.) We welcome master students, PhDs students and early-career researchers to submit a contribution; submissions will be evaluated by the Scientific Committee, and a decision will be communicated 2-3 months before the conference. Please visit our website or contact us through the form or the email available at www.phdsxiii.org.
INVITED SPEAKERS:
Maria Aloni
Ivano Ciardelli
Sandra Müller
Greg Restall
Juoko Väänänen
The conference will be held in person in the Campus Luigi Einaudi, University of Turin. We are confident that at the end of the summer the pandemic situation will be under control.
If you are interested, please register as soon as possible, and do not forget to submit your title and abstract if you want to contribute with a short talk. We also kindly ask you to share this announcement with all people who might be interested in the event.
IMPORTANT DEADLINES:
30/04/2022: Abstract submission for contributed talks
20/07/2022: Registration (If you need a child-care, please let us know by email/contact-form within June 20th 2022)
ABSTRACT SUBMISSION DETAILS:
Submission of an abstract is through the easychair platform; information and link for submission are at the following https://www.phdsxiii.org/submissions.
The submitted abstract must be in pdf format and it must be ready for blind review, therefore it should not contain any author's information. Abstracts must be no more than 1000 words long (not including references).
PhD students, master students, and first-year postdocs in logic from disciplines that include, but are not limited to, linguistics, mathematics, and philosophy are invited to submit an extended abstract on their research.
LLC Workshop
Evidence and Scientific Method
Friday 2 December 2022
09:30 - 12:45 Biblioteca di Filosofia (Sala 1)
9:30 Jacob Stegenga (Cambridge University): "Simulating medicine: testing speculations about medical science and clinical practice" (joint work with Hamed Tabatabaei Ghomi)
10:30 Coffee Break
10:45 Caterina Marchionni (University of Helsinki): "Evidential variety and mixed-method research" (joint work with Jaakko Kuorikoski)
11:45 Gustavo Cevolani (IMT Lucca): "Reverse Inference in Cognitive Neuroscience and Inference to the Best Explanation" (joint work with Davide Coraci and Igor Douven)
12:45 Lunch Break
The workshop will be followed by the doctoral thesis defense of Malvina Ongaro (Università del Piemonte Orientale) and Cristina Sagrafena (Università di Torino). The event will take place in Aula 4.03 (Via Sant’Ottavio 54), starting from 14:45:
14:45 Cristina Sagrafena (University of Turin): "Epistemic Values and Scientific Theories" (PhD Thesis Defense)
16:00 Coffee Break
16:15 Malvina Ongaro (University of Eastern Piedmont): "Uncertainty for Uncertain Decision-Makers"? (PhD Thesis Defense)
17:30 End of workshop
18:00 Aperitivi at bar "Klec", including official proclamation of the PhD grades
09/02/23 Workshop on Inferentialism and Connexivity
18/09/23 Sessismo e anti-sessismo nel linguaggio II
10:00-10:15 Vincenzo Crupi and Andrea Iacona, Introduction
10:15-11:15 Hitoshi Omori, Why Connexive Logic?
11:30-12:15 Martina Calderisi, Extended Evidentialism and Connexivity
Lunch Break
14:00-14:45 Guido Gherardi and Eugenio Orlandelli, Super-Strict Implication
15:00-15:45 Claudio Pizzi, Implicative Conditionals, Consequential Conditionals and Necessity Operators
16:00-17:00 Heinrich Wansing, Logical bilateralism and Connexive Logic
TRUTH, VAGUENESS AND SEMANTIC INDETERMINACY.
WHEN: Nov. 30th, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. – Dec. 1st, 2023 at 7:00 p.m.
WHERE: Sala Lauree Gallino, Palazzo Nuovo, via Sant’Ottavio 20, Torino.
