Thanks Anna!

ubc.zoom.us/meeting/regi...

This should be an interesting event with Jacob Stegenga. Online and open to. You just need to preregister. Link in poster and in comment below.

It is in fact a fantastic book. I read a couple of different drafts.

This is a project that started in 2006 and literally took forever--which statistical mechanics says is impossible.

Why did they induct him in the first place. For his flying car? Or his Hyperloop train?

Trump is going to make Canada go to war somehow? What does this mean?

Really, Google? Really?

a crackpot conspiracy theory? What forces allow the scientific community to be so fundamentally distorted that they can not only achieve consensus on a falsehood, but consensus that the truth is an obvious crackpot conspiracy theory.

Otherwise we learn nothing.

Everyone is falling in line in the obvious truth here. But don't let them conceal the details. What was the project? Was it project DEFUSE? Who funded it? NIH? NIAID? Who covered it up? What caused the entire scientific community to endorse the claim that the truth was ...

Oh wow, that is a bit much back to back.

Public talk on Moral-Epistemic duties in Model Building by @ewinsberg.bsky.social Fine, I’ll cycle up Castle Hill on this occasion #Philsci

We can't all be fancy not-up-the-hill colleges, like Kings.

cool, thanks. but yeah, this is mostly for something steph is working on.

This is a slightly self indulgent post, but if you have used anything written by myself and Stephanie Harvard, or the movie "moral models" in one of your classes, could you note so below? I would appreciate it. (Also if you know of someone else who hasn't posted).

This definitely sounds interesting

bsky.app/profile/stel...

philarchive.org/rec/DORGIS

Haha, since the days of the paper in synthese about non-classical logics being as bad as homosexuality (or something equally bonkers) guest editors have less leway than they used to.

"Science, which we may understand broadly as the natural, social and human sciences, depends on gatekeeping to maintain its epistemic credentials. It must keep out pretenders while remaining porous to outside-the-box insights and to criticisms of its own shibboleths."

Don't be so sure. We might have a paper on parapsychology.

Great framing for a special issue #metascience #philsci #histsci #sts

Would love a submission from you.

Yup

Synthese special issue CFP gatekeeping in science.

Editors: Katherine Dormandy & Eric Winsberg @ewinsberg.bsky.social

Deadline 25 April 25

#philsci #philsky

link.springer.com/collections/...

Katherine Dormandy and I are officially editing a special issue of *Synthese* on Gatekeeping in Science. The call for papers is attached. It should be a fun issue.

link.springer.com/collections/...

Well, see here we have two parallel disagreements. I think it must be their values. And that's why I say "expression of". I don't know what it means to act on someone else's values precisely because my values just are half of my dispositions to act.

But don't phrase it as if theres some objectively correct standard that they raise it from. It just that they are using a higher standard than the public would given their different values.

I think this almost certainly happens. And yes, in this case they should be incentivized not to do this if the public values other things more. At the very least because otherwise you get backlash. (As we've seen).