Science delivers complex, imperfect, and sometimes even contradictory information.
This raises pressing challenges in disciplines like epistemology, social sciences, and the theory of reasoning.
On the one hand, recent and controversial scientific achievements (often related to crucial aspects of people’s lives, as in case of the Covid pandemic, or in the analysis of uncertain contexts like those related to environmental matters and public decisions) force us to replace idealized agents with non-idealised ones, and require us to formally model their reasoning when they are confronted with information that overcomes their rational capacities. Computational limits, lack of awareness and imperfect logical competence have to be taken into account in these contexts. In turn, these suggest unexpected revisions of traditional epistemological notions, such as rationality and knowledge.
On the other hand, the epistemology has to be widened from the perspective of individual agents  to that of collective subjects of belief and knowledge such as communities or scientific groups. Which is then the role of the experts and how can we recognize them? How much deference should we rationally accord them? What is the logic of peer disagreement between experts when expertise becomes a contentious matter? What are the epistemic consequences of considering knowledge as pertaining to groups and epistemic communities instead of individual subjects? These are only a few among the many questions that recent developments in science compel contemporary epistemology to face.
The workshop gathers scholars at the crossroads between social epistemology, formal epistemology and epistemic logic, in order to investigate how the interaction between the different perspectives in these fields can fruitfully contribute to a better understanding of current epistemic scenarios.

PROGRAM

10.00-11.00
Chiara Lisciandra (MCMP, LMU Munich; University of Milan)
Explanatory Norms Across Disciplinary Boundaries

11.00-11.15 short break

11.15-12.15
Francesco Nappo (Politecnico di Milano)
Can Kuhn and Bayes Meet?

12.15-13.15
Colin R. Caret (Utrecht University)
Bounding Belief: the Problem of Logical Omniscience and the Value of Logical  Modeling

13.15-14.30 lunch

14.30-15.30
Michel Croce (University of Genoa)
Pseudo-Experts and the Credentials Problem

15.30-16.30
Tommaso Piazza (University of Pavia)
Epistemic Blame and Non-Ideal Epistemology

16.30-16.45 short break

16.45-17.45
Anna-Maria A. Eder (University of Cologne)
Evidence and Value

Organizers: Ludovica Conti (IUSS Pavia), Silvia De Toffoli (IUSS Pavia), Andrea Sereni (IUSS Pavia), Guido Tana (NOVA Lisbon).

In-person venue: Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS, Aula Magna - Sala del Camino, Palazzo del Broletto, 27100 Pavia (PV)

Virtual venue:  https://iusspavia.zoom.us/j/81421394754

Activity funded by MUR PRO3 project "Understanding Public Data: Experts, Decisions, Epistemic Values” and MUR D.M. 737 project (ID DM737FTJCG). L&PIC - Linguistics and Philosophy IUSS Center. Epistemology and Philosophy of Mathematics Research Group.