Periodic Reporting for period 1 - SciTEr (History and Philosophy of Scientific Thought Experiments and Scientific Practices)
Berichtszeitraum: 2019-05-01 bis 2022-04-30
How can we gain knowledge of the natural world without conducting real and direct experiments? That is, how can we investigate a target system (for instance a black hole) without ever observing or manipulating it? It is this question that I tackled during this project. For that, I analysed different scientific tools such as Analogy and Analogue Experiments, Models, Thought Experiments and Computer Simulations. These tools permit "surrogative reasoning"; scientists investigate material and/or theoretical accessible systems in order to draw conclusions about -- usually inaccessible -- target system. Surrogative reasoning is thus an effective form of scientific thinking especially used when scientists do not have direct empirical access to the target systems. It is increasingly adopted in various scientific fields, as it is the most (sometimes only) effective way to draw inferences when direct experimentation is precluded: for instance, because the target system is too far away (e.g. black holes), too small (e.g. elementary particles), too complex (e.g. climate), too expensive to construct (e.g. real-scaled bridges), unethical/dangerous to experiment on (e.g. pharmacology). Notwithstanding its ubiquitous role in science, the epistemological foundations of surrogative reasoning raise outstanding philosophical issues. E.g. the conclusions of its inferences are neither logically certain, nor empirically grounded – which opens a series of questions with respect to the confirmation and disconfirmation of hypotheses through surrogative means. My projects tackled such issues from an integrated history and philosophy of science perspective.
Why is it important for society?
Society faces at least two major challenges: Climate change and the Coronavirus Pandemic. To tackle both, decision makers are relying more and more on science. In investigating these topics, scientists mainly rely on results generated by the above tools that permit surrogative reasoning, seeing that direct experiments on real populations and on the climate are precluded. For instance, they construct and investigate hypothetical and counterfactual scenarios in order to draw conclusion about the evolution of the climate and the pandemic. This is one aspect of the project that is the most relevant to society. I took the notion of scenario seriously and started analysing its role in science. Indeed, it is important to understand the kind of knowledge and predictions/projections reasoning on scenarios could provide. Understanding this helps clarifying some mischaracterization concerning the use of science in policy, thus reducing scepticism against science, something we desperately need. My research on scenarios is ongoing with a new project on climate science.
What are the overall objectives?
The project tackled two main objectives: First, I articulated and defended a novel epistemic account of scientific thought experiments that characterizes their function as inconsistency revealers and resolvers. In it, the notion of scenario played a central role.
Second, I started a larger project on surrogative reasoning in which I aim at doing a comparative analysis between several tools and their epistemologies, in particular between Thought Experiments, Computer Simulations, Scientific Models, and Analogical Experiments.
Why is it important for society?
Society faces at least two major challenges: Climate change and the Coronavirus Pandemic. To tackle both, decision makers are relying more and more on science. In investigating these topics, scientists mainly rely on results generated by the above tools that permit surrogative reasoning, seeing that direct experiments on real populations and on the climate are precluded. For instance, they construct and investigate hypothetical and counterfactual scenarios in order to draw conclusion about the evolution of the climate and the pandemic. This is one aspect of the project that is the most relevant to society. I took the notion of scenario seriously and started analysing its role in science. Indeed, it is important to understand the kind of knowledge and predictions/projections reasoning on scenarios could provide. Understanding this helps clarifying some mischaracterization concerning the use of science in policy, thus reducing scepticism against science, something we desperately need. My research on scenarios is ongoing with a new project on climate science.
What are the overall objectives?
The project tackled two main objectives: First, I articulated and defended a novel epistemic account of scientific thought experiments that characterizes their function as inconsistency revealers and resolvers. In it, the notion of scenario played a central role.
Second, I started a larger project on surrogative reasoning in which I aim at doing a comparative analysis between several tools and their epistemologies, in particular between Thought Experiments, Computer Simulations, Scientific Models, and Analogical Experiments.
During the first part of the project (Months 1- 16) I worked on the research project first objective: the epistemology of thought experiments. I mainly worked on the philosophy of scientific thought experiments and conducted a historical analysis of case studies in physics as well as case studies in ongoing physics, in particular in black hole thermodynamics (with Patricia Palacios, Salzburg). I wrote, submitted, and published a novel epistemic account of thought experiments in physics, “Probing Theoretical Statements with Thought Experiments” which got published with Synthese in 2021. I also finished working on a monograph (in French) entitled Les Expériences de pensée en Physique, édition matériologique, it is currently under review and scheduled to appear in 2022.
During the second part of the project (Months 17- 32) I worked on the research project second objective: surrogative reasoning in the science. To this aim, I surveyed the existent literature on computer simulations, analogue experiments, models and the epistemology of imagination. I organised a bi-monthly seminar and co-organized an international workshop “Scientific and Epistemic Tools”. These led to a Topical Collection of Synthese entitled “Surrogative Reasoning in the Sciences” that I am co-editing with Laura Felline (Roma), Patricia Palacios (Salzburg) and Giovanni Valente (Milano) https://www.springer.com/journal/11229/updates/18897284. I am finishing a paper on thought experiments and analogue experiments in black hole physics (with P. Palacios), to be submitted for the topical collection in March 2022. I also wrote a book review of Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science by Jimena Canales for the History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. Furthermore, I attended the Urbino 2021 summer school on black hole physics.
During these two years I was very active in different projects. I developed and coordinated an international research group on surrogative reasoning. I became an active member of the “Irvine-London-Munich-Polimi-Salzburg” (ILMPS) network in philosophy in foundations of physics and of Lake geneva Biological Interest Group (LgBIG), University of Geneva. I gave five talks, three as an invited speaker and two following a blind review process. Finally, I taught two master courses at the department of philosophy (KGW) of the university of Salzburg, one entitled “Surrogative Reasoning in the Sciences”, the other “Philosophy of Scientific and Epistemic Tools”.
Conclusion of the action: I proposed and defended that thought experiments function as inconsistency revealers and resolvers. I started a comparative analysis between several scientific tools that permit surrogative reasoning.
During the second part of the project (Months 17- 32) I worked on the research project second objective: surrogative reasoning in the science. To this aim, I surveyed the existent literature on computer simulations, analogue experiments, models and the epistemology of imagination. I organised a bi-monthly seminar and co-organized an international workshop “Scientific and Epistemic Tools”. These led to a Topical Collection of Synthese entitled “Surrogative Reasoning in the Sciences” that I am co-editing with Laura Felline (Roma), Patricia Palacios (Salzburg) and Giovanni Valente (Milano) https://www.springer.com/journal/11229/updates/18897284. I am finishing a paper on thought experiments and analogue experiments in black hole physics (with P. Palacios), to be submitted for the topical collection in March 2022. I also wrote a book review of Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science by Jimena Canales for the History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. Furthermore, I attended the Urbino 2021 summer school on black hole physics.
During these two years I was very active in different projects. I developed and coordinated an international research group on surrogative reasoning. I became an active member of the “Irvine-London-Munich-Polimi-Salzburg” (ILMPS) network in philosophy in foundations of physics and of Lake geneva Biological Interest Group (LgBIG), University of Geneva. I gave five talks, three as an invited speaker and two following a blind review process. Finally, I taught two master courses at the department of philosophy (KGW) of the university of Salzburg, one entitled “Surrogative Reasoning in the Sciences”, the other “Philosophy of Scientific and Epistemic Tools”.
Conclusion of the action: I proposed and defended that thought experiments function as inconsistency revealers and resolvers. I started a comparative analysis between several scientific tools that permit surrogative reasoning.
Research outputs of this work will impact European research excellence by contributing a ground-breaking novel approach to scientific thought experiments. The connection I am doing between different philosophical literature on Models, Computer Simulations, Thought Experiments and Analogue Experiments is novel, and the hope is that it will provide a unifying picture of scientific methodologies, by focusing on reasoning surrogatively with scenarios.
The dissemination of the results will impact European society in that they will contribute to the public debate on the nature of scientific knowledge gained by reasoning surrogatively on scenarios and, more generally, will clarify how scientists are tackling two major issues that are and will influence each and every one of us: pandemics and climate change.
My work on this project led me to pursue a new project on which I will focus on one of these two challenges, i.e. climate science. In this project I will continue my analysis on scenarios, seeing the central role they play in climate science. Indeed, the IPCC6 report is largely based on the idea of socio-economic scenarios. For that project, I got recently appointed as an assistant professor (RTD-A) at Politecnico of Milan, 4 months before the end date of my MSCA project.
The dissemination of the results will impact European society in that they will contribute to the public debate on the nature of scientific knowledge gained by reasoning surrogatively on scenarios and, more generally, will clarify how scientists are tackling two major issues that are and will influence each and every one of us: pandemics and climate change.
My work on this project led me to pursue a new project on which I will focus on one of these two challenges, i.e. climate science. In this project I will continue my analysis on scenarios, seeing the central role they play in climate science. Indeed, the IPCC6 report is largely based on the idea of socio-economic scenarios. For that project, I got recently appointed as an assistant professor (RTD-A) at Politecnico of Milan, 4 months before the end date of my MSCA project.