hps&sthps&stnewsletter may2021 xrmtg7sje4b2ddd. this token is part of the abovewebaddress....
TRANSCRIPT
HPS&STNEWSLETTER
hps&stnewsletter
june 2021
The hps&st newsletter is emailed monthly toabout 9,500 individuals who directly or indirectlyhave an interest in the contribution of history andphilosophy of science to theoretical, curricularand pedagogical issues in science teaching, and/orinterests in the promotion of innovative, engagingand effective teaching of the history and philo-sophy of science. The newsletter is sent on todifferent international and national hps lists andinternational and national science teaching lists.In print or electronic form, it has been publishedfor 40+ years.
The newsletter seeks to serve the diverse interna-tional community of hps&st scholars and teach-ers by disseminating information about eventsand publications that connect to concerns of thehps&st community.
Contributions to the newsletter (publications,conferences, opinion pieces, &.) are welcome and
should be sent direct to the editor: Michael R.Matthews, unsw ([email protected]).
The newsletter, along with resources, obitu-aries, opinion pieces and more, are available atthe website: http://www.hpsst.com/
hps&st newsletter staff
Editor Michael Matthews
Assistant Editor(Opinion Page& Formatting) Nathan Oseroff-Spicer
Assistant Editor(Publications& Website) Paulo Maurício
issn: 2652-2837
contents
2
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
Michael R. Matthews: History,Philosophy and Science Teaching:A Personal Story, Springer, 2021
This book of ten chapters, 298 + xxv pages and 800references is an historical narrative of the author’sacademic appointments, his significant researchand publication endeavours, important editorialand institutional engagements, and appraisals ofmany important debates and contributors in sci-ence education.
The author is Honorary Associate Professor inthe School of Education at the University of NewSouth Wales. He has degrees in Geology, Psycho-logy, Philosophy, History and Philosophy of Sci-ence, and Philosophy of Education.
He has taught in high school, teachers’ collegeand university; was Foundation Professor of Sci-
ence Education at the University of Auckland; wasFoundation President of the International His-tory, Philosophy and Science Teaching Group;was Foundation President of the Inter-DivisionalTeaching Commission of the dhst and dlmps;and is a Fellow of the Royal Society (New SouthWales).
The ten chapters begin with his Australian-Irishfamily life, his Catholic school education, his richundergraduate education, then further degrees atSydney University whilst school teaching, thenrange over a number of the central theoretical,curricular and pedagogical issues in science edu-cation to which he has contributed. The finalchapter is a proposal for hps-informed scienceteacher education.
The book gives accounts of philosophers whogreatly influenced his own thinking and who alsowere personal friends – Wallis Suchting, AbnerShimony, Robert Cohen, Marx Wartofsky, IsraelScheffler, Michael Martin and Mario Bunge.
The book, throughout, advocates the importanceof clear writing and avoidance of faddism in bothphilosophy and in education. It documents, dis-turbingly, many examples of the latter.
Positive reviews by Michael Reiss (Science Edu-cation, University College London), Eric Scerri(Chemistry Department, University of CaliforniaLos Angeles) and Roland Schulz (Education, Si-mon Fraser University) are available here.
Book details, chapter titles and previews, and pur-chasing information can be seen here.
The book is available in print copy and eBook.From June 20 to July 18 there is a 20% dis-count available by using the following Springertoken when purchasing from the Springer site:
3
hps&st newsletter may 2021
xRMtG7SJe4B2Ddd. This token is part of theabove web address.
The book is available to individuals as a MyCopyfor eur/usd25. This is simply a paperback ver-sion of the print hardcover book. Obtaining aMy-Copy requires first that an individual’s institutionhas purchased the eBook. It does not apply whenthe hardcover alone has been purchased, thoughthe eBook alone suffices to make the MyCopyavailable. This often happens automatically as theeBookwill be part of a Springer package bought byinstitutions. If not, the institution needs to inde-pendently purchase the eBook. Librarians can ad-vise through which channels the MyCopy is thenpurchased. This is a most suitable arrangementfor instructors wishing to use the book as a coursetext.
Springer are facilitating reviews of the book inrelevant hps, Philosophy, Education and ScienceEducation journals and newsletters. Review edit-ors should send reviewer’s name and email, alongwith journal/newsletter name and website to:
Nick Melchior [email protected]
Reviewers are initially provided with the eBook,and upon publication of the review, are mailed theprint version.
Paul Bunge Prize 2022
The German Chemical Society (GesellschaftDeutscher Chemiker - GDCh) and the GermanBunsen Society for Physical Chemistry (DeutscheBunsen-Gesellschaft für Physikalische Chemie)invite proposals for the Paul Bunge Prize 2022.
The prize is awarded annually by the Hans R.Jenemann-Foundation and is named after Paul
Bunge (1839–1888), the most important maker ofprecision balances in the second half of the nine-teenth century.
The Paul Bunge Prize honours outstanding re-search publications on all aspects of the historyof scientific instruments. The prize is endowedwith 7.500 Euro. It is awarded for either indi-vidual books or papers published within the lastfive years or for lifetime achievements. Submit-ted works may be published in English, Germanor French.
Both self-applications and nominations are accep-ted. Both should include the publications to beconsidered, a curriculum vitae and a complete listof publications. The Advisory Board of the HansR. Jenemann Foundation will decide on the prizewinner.
Submit your application or nomination, includ-ing a cover letter, by 30 September 2021 via theonline form at www.gdch.de/paulbungepreis or [email protected]. Though digital versions are expli-citly preferred, printed copies can be sent to theGDCh office attn: Dr. Jasmin Herr.
Further Information:Gesellschaft Deutscher Chemiker,Dr. Jasmin Herr - [email protected]
German Society for Philosophy ofScience, Fourth International Con-ference, Berlin March 2022
The German Society for Philosophy of Sci-ence (Gesellschaft für Wissenschaftsphilosophie –gwp) was founded in September 2011 with theaim to better integrate the community of philo-
4
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
sophers of science and scientists interested inphilosophy of science in Germany and therebyto promote the field at a local and internationallevel. The gwp organises an international confer-ence every three years. Our fourth conference willbe hosted by the tu Berlin in March 2022.
We invite contributed papers across all fields ofphilosophy of science. Contributed papers will beclustered into parallel sessions focusing on partic-ular themes or special sciences.
The recommended conference language is Eng-lish, but contributions in Germanwill also be con-sidered.
Local organisers: Axel Gelfert (chair), Birgit Beck,Beate Krickelgwp organisers: Gerhard Schurz (president),Uljana Feest, Christian J. Feldbacher-Escamilla,Alexander Gebharter, Vera Hoffmann-Kolss,Thomas Reydon
For submission via EasyChair see: http://gwp2022.wissphil.deThe deadline for all submissions is: June 30, 2021.
Philosophy of Science Association(psa) Covid Teaching Resources
Teaching Philosophy in the Time of covid is anew resource page on the psa website. It featuressyllabi, articles, videos, podcasts, and other re-sources related to philosophy and the coronavirus.If you’ve found an interesting source on philo-sophy and the coronavirus, we invite you to sub-mit it. The page will be updated weekly withnew materials that are useful for professors teach-ing philosophy and covid in the classroom or forwhomever is trying to think philosophically about
the pandemic.
Details available here.
Assistant Editor Required, hps&stNewsletter
The History, Philosophy and Science TeachingNewsletter has been produced, in one form or an-other, for 40+ years. It is now published on theweb. The Contents announcement goes directlyto about 9,500 emails and to different hps lists andscience education lists.
The newsletter has been edited by MichaelMatthews at the University of New SouthWales ([email protected]). There aretwo Assistant Editors, Paulo Maurício, Lisbon([email protected]) and Nathan Oseroff-Spicer, London, ([email protected]).
A third assistant editor is now being sought in or-der to contribute to the Contents and Promotionof the newsletter, and particularly with seekingout and inviting Opinion Page essays from scienceeducators and historians and philosophers of sci-ence. This is an opportunity to join an establishedteam and contribute to the growth of the interna-tional hps&st community.
All enquiries to the editor or assistant editors.
Opinion Page: Where Science andMiraclesMeet, AlanLightman,MIT
Alan Paige Lightman is an American physicist,writer, and social entrepreneur. He hasserved on the faculties of Harvard Univer-sity and Massachusetts Institute of Techno-
5
hps&st newsletter may 2021
logy (MIT) and is currently a Professor of the Prac-tice of theHumanities at theMassachusetts Instituteof Technology (MIT). He was one of the first peopleat MIT to have a joint faculty position in both thesciences and the humanities. In his thinking andwriting, Lightman is known for exploring the in-tersection of the sciences and the humanities, es-pecially the dialogue between science, philosophy,religion, and spirituality.
He is the author of the international best-seller Einstein’s Dreams which has been translatedinto more than 30 languages and adapted intodozens of independent theatrical and musical pro-ductions worldwide, most recently (2019) at the offBroadway Prospect Theatre in New York. It is oneof the most widely used “common books” on col-lege campuses. Lightman’s novel The Diagnosis wasa finalist for the National Book Award. He is alsothe founder of Harpswell, a non-profit organisationwhose mission is to advance a new generation ofwomen leaders in Southeast Asia.
On the morning of October 13, 1917, a yearfrom the end of World War I, a crowd of tens ofthousands gathered in the town of Fátima, Por-tugal. They came to witness a miracle. Three
shepherd children had prophesied that the Vir-gin Mary would miraculously appear on that dayand give the world a sign. In the previous severalmonths, the three children–Lúcia Abobora, andFrancisco and Jacinto Marto–had claimed to haveseen apparitions, visions much discussed by thePortuguese press. On this day, the gathered pil-grims apparently got what they came for, a spec-tacle since referred to as “the Miracle of the Sun.”One journalist at the scene, Avelino de Almeida,an editor at O Século, reported in his paper:
One can see the immense crowd turn toward thesun …and we hear the nearest spectators crying,“Miracle, miracle! Marvel, marvel!” Before the as-tonished eyes of the people …the sun has trembled,and the sun has made some brusque movements,unprecedented and outside of all cosmic laws–thesun has “danced” …The greatest number avow thatthey have seen the trembling and dancing of thesun. Others, however, declare that they have seenthe smiling face of the Virgin herself; swear that thesun turned aroundon itself like awheel of fireworks,that it fell almost to the point of burning the earthwith its rays.
I’ve had miracles on my mind for a number ofreasons. To start with, a few friends recently toldme about personal experiences that they thoughtweremiracles. I also came upon some survey data.According to the Pew Research Center, as manyas 79 percent of Americans believe in miracles –events that lie outside natural law and any explan-ation by science. Not just the parting of the RedSea or the resurrection of Jesus or the splittingof the moon by Muhammad, but “supernatural”phenomena in the world of today: such things asghosts, voices from the dead, instructions fromGod, accurate prophecies, sudden recoveries fromgrave illnesses, telekinesis, reincarnation. Hun-dreds of people write to the evangelical Mario
6
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
Murillo Ministries website with reports of mir-acles.
A woman recently described there how herbrother’s stroke and paralysis in March 2019 hadbeen cured overnight by prayer. “I have no doubtit was a miracle,” she said. The violinist and mu-sician Bonnie Rideout wrote to me about her firstmiraculous experience:
An unexplainable light appeared before me in thealfalfa field. It was a ball of light about six feet off theground, motionless and accompanied by a warmgentle breeze. I had a feeling of warmth and peace.Even at the age of six and never having been told ofguardian angels, I knew itwas something of such ilk.It was the first experience I had that made me con-scious of a mystical entity that has intentions and isaware of me always.
These are just two accounts from the roughly200 million miracle believers in the United Statestoday. Manymiracles are associated withGod, butnot all are. According to Pew, 65 percent of Amer-icans believe inmiracles not necessarily connectedto God.
In contrast to this widespread belief in miracles,the great majority of scientists firmly and un-equivocally reject anything “supernatural.” Givensome ostensibly miraculous event, almost all sci-entists will insist on a logical, rational, “natural”explanation. (Scientists dismiss the Fatima Mir-acle of the Sun as the result of local atmospheric ef-fects, spurious images on the retina brought aboutby staring at the sun, and self-delusion.) If no lo-gical or rational explanation immediately presentsitself, most scientists will conclude that a scientificexplanationwill eventually be forthcoming, ratherthan abandon their commitment to a totally lawfuluniverse.
This prevailing viewwas articulated tome recentlyby the Nobel Prize–winning biologist David Bal-timore:
If I could not find any way out of believing that amiracle had occurred, would I then believe it to beamiracle? I think the answer is that I would still notbelieve it to be a miracle, only some outcome that Ican’t understand.
When believers and nonbelievers discuss or wit-ness a seemingly miraculous event, they find littlecommon ground, as if one is speaking Frenchand the other Swahili. Such radically different at-titudes represent radically different views of theworld, which are largely impervious to argumentor appearance and have some resonance with ourdeeply polarised society today. And yet, surpris-ingly, some recent proposals in physics reveal thatbelievers and nonbelieversmay havemore in com-mon than they think.
The miraculous has meaning and definition onlyby comparison with the non-miraculous. That is,for an event to be declared “supernatural,” wemustfirst have some concept of the “natural,” the or-dinary course of events. Early human beings hadno such concept – except perhaps for individualdeaths and the repeated rising and setting of thesun. Phenomena simply happened. Nature wasstrange, sometimes beautiful, largely unpredict-able, and often frightening. Some concept of the“supernatural” must have been understood in thepowers attributed to the gods and spirits of earlycivilisations. These mythic beings could performfeats beyond those possible for mortal flesh andblood. According to ancient Chinese belief, thegod of archery, Yi, had such prowess with the bowand arrow that he shot down nine of the 10 sunsthat crossed the sky. And there was clearly an es-tablished concept of the miraculous in the feats of
7
hps&st newsletter may 2021
Jesus.
The development of the so-called laws of naturein science, which began with the ancient Greeks,gave a sharper definition of the natural versus thesupernatural. Around 250 b.c., Archimedes pro-posed his “law of floating bodies,” which statedhowmuch liquid would be displaced by a partiallysubmerged object: a weight equal to the weight ofthe object, regardless of its size or shape. IsaacNewton was a landmark figure in the emergingconcept of a lawful and miracle-free universe. His1687 law of gravity – stating that the gravitationalforce between two objects is proportional to theproduct of theirmasses and inversely proportionalto the square of their distance apart – was not onlyone of the first mathematical expressions of a fun-damental force underlying the motions of bodies.It was also the first proposal that a rule for the be-haviour of material bodies on Earth should applyin the heavens as well – that is, the first real under-standing of the universality of a law of nature.
Then, in the 19th century, physicists proposed andconfirmed detailed laws for the behaviour of elec-tricity and magnetism. By 1900, the absolute in-violability of the laws of nature was well estab-lished as part of the central doctrine of science.In the thousands of natural phenomena that sci-entists have observed–from the orbits of planets tothe firings of neurones to the radiation of atoms–they have always found rational, logical, and usu-ally testable explanations, cementing their belief inthe lawfulness and predictability of nature.
What is the origin of these strong commitmentsfor and against miracles?
Part of the appeal of miracles was stated by theScottish philosopher David Hume in his 1748 es-say “Of Miracles”: “The passion of surprise andwonder arising from miracles, being an agreeable
emotion, gives a sensible tendency towards the be-lief of those events from which it is derived.” Intheir book Wonders and the Order of Nature, thehistorians of science Lorraine Daston and Kath-arine Park document humankind’s enchantmentwith wonders and oddities. Things that don’t fit.Surprises and peculiarities. Miracles. Marco Poloenthuses over finding completely black lions in theIndian Kingdom of Quilon. Other travellers ex-citedly record gourds with little lamblike animalsinside, beasts with the faces of humans and thetails of scorpions, unicorns, and people who vomitworms.
Ross Peterson, a psychiatrist practicing in the Bo-ston area, told me: “We want miracles as a solu-tion to helplessness. We want miracles for mean-ing at a deeper level. Miracles lift us out of a hum-drum life.” Peterson says that all of us fall on aspectrum, with hysterical emotion at one end andemotionless rigidity at the other. I would sug-gest that those of us who believe in miracles aremore able to surrender ourselves fully to our emo-tional experiences and the nonmaterial world theymight represent, without attempting to analyse orreduce such experiences. Those of us who becomescientists, through our understanding of scientificachievements and especially the logical construc-tion of the laws of nature, are satisfied by a fullylawful explanation of the world and see no reasonto invoke anything supernatural.
That is not to say that scientists are emotionally ri-gid on Peterson’s spectrum. But they have com-partmentalised those emotions. Scientists havesuch abiding faith in a lawful cosmos that any per-sonal experience or recounted “story” that seemsto violate the laws of nature is recast as “to be un-derstood with a lawful explanation” rather thanaccepted as fundamentally unlawful or miracu-lous.
8
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
I remember when I first came to the “lawful ex-planation” viewpoint myself. At the age of twelveor thirteen, I built my own laboratory and stockedit with test tubes, petri dishes, Bunsen burners,beautiful curved glassware, resistors, capacitors,and coils of electrical wire. Among other pro-jects, I beganmaking pendulums by tying a fishingweight to the end of a string. I’d read in PopularScience or some similarmagazine that the time fora pendulum to make a complete swing was pro-portional to the square root of the length of thestring. With the help of a stopwatch and a ruler,I verified this wonderful law. Logic and pattern.Cause and effect. As far as I could tell, everythingwas subject to analysis and quantitative testing. Isaw no reason to believe in supernatural events orin any other unprovable hypotheses.
To Hume’s and Peterson’s arguments, I would addone more suggestion as to why many of us be-lieve in miracles. We desire escape from the lim-ited capacities of our material bodies. We yearnfor some kind of permanence, something eternal,something beyond our impending personal death.A world in which miracles occur might containsuch a possibility. In this regard, it is not surpris-ing that a survey by Pew’s 2014 Religious Land-scape Study found that 72 percent of Americansbelieve in heaven, defined as a place where “peoplewho have led good lives are eternally rewarded.”
Recent discoveries in science underscore the ex-treme commitments of believers and nonbelieversto their respective views of theworld. In the 1960s,scientists first noticed what has become known asthe “fine-tuning problem”: The numerical value ofmany of the fundamental constants of nature, suchas the speed of light or the strength of the forcesin the nuclei of atoms, must lie within a narrowrange for life to arise in our universe – not merelylife similar to life on Earth, but any kind of life.
For instance, if the strength of the nuclear forcehad been just a little greater, all of the hydrogenin the early universe would have fused to form he-lium. With no hydrogen remaining, there wouldbe no water. Biologists believe that water, with itsspecial chemical properties, is needed for life. Bycontrast, if the nuclear force had been just a littleweaker, the bigger atoms needed for life, such ascarbon and oxygen, could not hold together.
One of themost striking of these finely tuned con-stants is the amount of so-called dark energy inthe cosmos. Dark energy, first discovered in 1998,fills up all of outer space and acts in the oppos-ite way of normal gravity. It causes the galaxiesto move away from one another with increasingspeed. The density of dark energy has been meas-ured to be about 100-millionth of an erg per cu-bic centimetre. (Don’t worry if you aren’t famil-iar with these arcane units. The important point isthat it is a specific number.) If the amount of darkenergy in our universe were a little larger than itactually is, gaseousmatter could never have pulledtogether to form stars. A little smaller, and theuniverse would have re-collapsed and ended be-fore stars had time to form. Physicists have strongevidence that all of the bigger atoms needed for lifewere created at the centres of stars. Without stars,no big atoms and no life.
So how to explain this observed fine-tuning? Whyshould our universe care about life? There are twoexplanations, one offered by believers and one bynonbelievers. Believers give the argument of In-telligent Design: that the universe was designedby God, who wanted the universe to have life.Alvin Plantinga, a professor emeritus of philo-sophy at the University of Notre Dame, wrote,“It still seems striking that these constants shouldhave just the values they do have …It is still muchless improbable that they should have those values
9
hps&st newsletter may 2021
if there is a God who wanted a life-friendly uni-verse.”
Themajority of scientists are not comfortable withthis argument – not because it invokes God, butbecause it invokes a cause not subject to rationalanalysis. An explanation that many scientists ac-cept is what is called “the multiverse.” If thereare lots of universes with different properties –some with 17 dimensions or some with 12 dimen-sions, some with values of dark energy much lar-ger or much smaller than in our universe, somewith nuclear forces much stronger or weaker, andso on – then some of those universes would, bychance, have the right properties tomake stars andlife. Most would not. By definition, we live in oneof the universes that permits life. According to thisexplanation, our universe is just an accident, a ran-dom throw of the dice.
An analogous line of reasoning is the explanationof why our planet is the right distance away fromthe sun to have liquid water. If we were a bit closer,all of the water would evaporate in the high heat,and if we were a bit farther away, it would freeze inthe cold. The scientific answer to that seeminglyextraordinary fact is simply that there are lots ofplanets besides Earth. Some are the right distancefrom their central stars to have liquid water, butmost are not.
The inconvenient truth about both of these ex-planations of the fine-tuning problem – intelligentdesign, on the one hand, and the existence of amultiverse, on the other – is that neither can beproved. Both must be taken as a matter of faithby their respective supporters. Believers cannotprove the existence of God, much less what God’sintentions were in creating the universe. It is likelythat scientists will never be able to prove that otheruniverses exist. The different universes in the
hypothesised multiverse can never communicatewith one another for the infinite future. And ifthey were connected in some way in the infinitepast, confirming that connection would presentthe same problems as understanding how our uni-verse came into being before the Big Bang. Evenwith a theory, testing that theory would be next toimpossible. It is a testament to the powerful com-mitment of scientists to their belief in a totally law-ful andmiracle-free cosmos that they arewilling toinvoke a slew of probably unverifiable other uni-verses to uphold their belief.
In 1934, the great philosopher of science Karl Pop-per introduced the concept of falsifiability in de-termining the boundaries of science. A scientifictheory or idea can never be proved true, becausewe cannot be certain that tomorrow a new phe-nomenon won’t contradict the theory. However,a scientific theory can certainly be proved wrong,or falsified, by the observation of a single phe-nomenon at odds with it. Popper argued that if aproposition or belief or theory could not be tested,and thus potentially proved wrong, it did not liewithin the realm of what we call science. Philo-sophy or religion or mythology, perhaps, but notscience.
Which brings us back to the proposal of themulti-verse. Is it science or not? Are the many physicistswho endorse the multiverse idea thinking as sci-entists? There is indeed a chain of scientific argu-ment supporting the proposal. The Nobel Prize–winning physicist Steven Weinberg used the mul-tiverse idea to predict the approximate value ofdark energy before the value was discovered. Andthe Stanford University physicist Andrei Linde’stheory of “eternal chaotic inflation” actually pre-dicts the creation of multiple universes with dif-ferent properties. But the multiverse idea remainsuntested and probably untestable.
10
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
A similar predicament at the forefront of physicshas occurred with “string theory,” in which it isconjectured that the smallest subatomic entities ofmatter and energy are not point-like particles butone-dimensional “strings” of energy. Moreover,according to the requirements of the theory, thesestrings vibrate in a space of 10 or 11 dimensions– all but three (height, width, and length) curledup into ultra-tiny loops that we cannot see. Thereare strong theoretical ideas and a lot of beautifulmathematics in favour of string theory. But, aswith the multiverse idea, testing it may never bepossible.
So, we have reached a paradox: The commitmentto a totally scientific view of the world has ledto theories that may be unscientific, according toPopper’s definition of science. In a sense, the mir-acle believers and the miracle nonbelievers havefound a bit of common ground. This is not tosay that the transcendent experience of miracu-lous phenomena has somehow fused with the 0’sand 1’s of modern science, or that the world-viewsof believers and nonbelievers have merged. Butboth believers and nonbelievers have sworn alle-giance to concepts that cannot be proved. Thosepassionate beliefs must originate from somewheredeep inside our minds, a secret room that all of usshare, vital and primitive, like the ancient ritualsof our ancestors.
Reproduced with gratitude from: The AtlanticMarch 22, 2021
Invitation to Submit Opinion Piece
In order to make better educational use of thewide geographical and disciplinary reach of thishps&st newsletter, invitations are extended forreaders to contribute opinion or position pieces or
suggestions about any aspect of the past, presentor future of hps&st studies.
Contributions can be sent direct to MichaelMatthews or Nathan Oseroff-Spicer.
Ideally, they might be pieces that are already onthe web, in which case a few paragraphs introduc-tion, with link to web site can be sent, or else thepieces will be put on the web with a link given inthe newsletter.
They will be archived in the opinion folder at thehps&st web site: http://www.hpsst.com/.
PhDTheses in hps&st Domain
The hps&st newsletter is the ideal medium forpublicising and making known submitted andawarded doctoral theses in the hps&st domain.
The following details should be submitted to theeditor at [email protected]:
• Candidate’s name and email
• Institution
• Supervisor
• Thesis title
• Abstract of 100-300 words
• Web link when theses are required to be sub-mitted for open search on web.
Recent hps&st Research Articles
Journal of the History of Biology (Volume 54, issue1, April 2021)
11
hps&st newsletter may 2021
Special issue: Connecting to the Living His-tory of Radiation ExposureIssue editors: Jacob Darwin Hamblin & LindaM. Richards
Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences (Vol. 51,Issue 2, April 2021)Special Issue: Revealing the MichiganMemorial–Phoenix ProjectIssue Editors: Joseph D. Martin, GiselaMateos, David P.D. Munns, Edna Suárez-Díazdoi:10.1525/hsns.2021.51.2.169
Synthese (Volume 198, Supplement Issue 10, May2021)Special Issue: Philosophy of EpidemiologyIssue Editors: Jonathan Michael Kaplan, andSean A Valles
Astobiza, A. M. (2021). Science, misinforma-tion and digital technology during the Covid-19 pandemic. History and Philosophy of theLife Sciences, 43(68), 1-6. doi:10.1007/s40656-021-00424-4
Bertozzi, E. (2021). ‘Seeing with one’s own eyes’and speaking to the mind: A history of theWilson cloud chamber in the teaching of phys-ics. The British Journal for the History of Sci-ence, 1-17. doi:10.1017/S0007087421000261online first
Blom, N. & Abrie, A.L. (2021) Students’ percep-tions of the nature of technology and its rela-tionship with science following an integratedcurriculum. International Journal of ScienceEducation.doi:10.1080/09500693.2021.1930273 onlinefirst
Duijf, H.(2021). Should one trust experts?. Syn-these, 1-24. doi:10.1007/s11229-021-03203-7
online first
Emden, M. (2021). Reintroducing “the” Sci-entific Method to Introduce Scientific Inquiryin Schools? A Cautioning Plea Not to ThrowOut the Baby with the Bathwater. Sci & Educ,1-37. doi:10.1007/s11191-021-00235-w on-line first
Eren, E. (2021). Exploring Science Identity De-velopment of Women in Physics and Phys-ical Sciences in Higher Education: A CaseStudy from Ireland. Sci & Educ, 1-28.doi:10.1007/s11191-021-00220-3 online first
Hansen,B. (2021). Pasteur’s lifelong engage-ment with the fine arts: uncovering a sci-entist’s passion and personality. Annals ofScience. doi:10.1080/00033790.2021.1921275online first
Krashniak, A. (2021). The struggle for life and ad-aptation by natural selection. Biol Philos, 1-16.doi:10.1007/s10539-021-09803-4 online first
Kruse, J., Kent-Schneider, I., Voss, S. et al. (2021).Investigating Student Nature of Science Viewsas Reflections of Authentic Science: Degreesof Contextualisation and the Teachers’ Role.Sci & Educ, 1-21. doi:10.1007/s11191-021-00231-0 online first
Lee, S. W.-Y. et al. (2021). Measuring epistemo-logies in science learning and teaching: A sys-tematic review of the literature. Science Edu-cation. doi:10.1002/sce.21663 online first
Muller, F.A. (2021). The Influence of QuantumPhysics on Philosophy. Found Sci, 1-12.doi:10.1007/s10699-020-09725-6 online first
Odden,T.O.B., Marin, A., & Rudolph, J. L.(2021).How has Science Education changed over the
12
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
last 100 years? An analysis using natural lan-guage processing. Science Education, 1-28.doi:10.1002/sce.21623 online first
Plaisance, K.S., Graham, A.V., McLevey, J., &Michaud, J. (2021). Show Me the Numbers: AQuantitative Portrait of the Attitudes, Experi-ences, and Values of Philosophers of ScienceRegarding Broadly Engaged Work. Synthese,198, 4603-4633. doi:10.1007/s11229-019-02359-7
Plaisance, K.S. (2021), Michaud, J., & McLevey,J. (2021). Pathways of Influence: Under-standing the Impacts of Philosophy of Sci-ence in Scientific Domains. Synthese, 1-32.doi:10.1007/s11229-020-03007-1 online first
Plaisance, K.S. (2020), “The Benefits of Acquir-ing Interactional Expertise: Why (Some)Philosophers of Science Should Engage Sci-entific Communities. Studies in History andPhilosophy of Science Part A, 83, 53-62.doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.03.002
Portugal, K.O., Arruda, S.d. & Passos, M.M.(2021). Strands of Science Teaching: A Toolfor the Analysis of Science Teaching Venues.Sci & Educ, 1-23. doi:10.1007/s11191-021-00213-2 online first
Quílez, J. (2021). Le Châtelier’s Principlea Language, Methodological and Ontolo-gical Obstacle: An Analysis of GeneralChemistry Textbooks. Sci & Educ, 1-36.doi:10.1007/s11191-021-00214-1 online first
Reydon, T.A.C.(2021). Misconceptions, concep-tual pluralism, and conceptual toolkits: bring-ing the philosophy of science to the teach-ing of evolution. Euro Jnl Phil Sci, 1-13.doi:10.1007/s13194-021-00363-8 online first
Serpico, D. (2021). The Cyclical Return of theIQ Controversy: Revisiting the Lessons of theResolution onGenetics, Race and Intelligence.J Hist Biol, 1-30. doi:10.1007/s10739-021-09637-6 online first
Sztejnberg, A. (2021). Albert Ladenburg (1842-1911) – The Distinguished German Chem-ist and Historian of Chemistry of the SecondHalf of the XIX Century (To the 110thAnniversary of His Death). Substantia.doi:10.36253/Substantia-1231 just accepted
Tseng. A S., Bonilla, S., & MacPherson, A.(2021). Fighting “bad science” in the informa-tion age: The effects of an intervention to stim-ulate evaluation and critique of false scientificclaims. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.doi:10.1002/tea.21696 online first
Upahi, J.E., Ramnarain, U. (2021). Evidenceof Foundational Knowledge and ConjecturalPathways in Science Learning Progressions:A Review of Research. Sci & Educ, 1-38.doi:10.1007/s11191-021-00226-x online first
Voss, S., Kruse, J. & Kent-Schneider, I. (2021).Comparing Student Responses to Con-vergent, Divergent, and Evaluative Natureof Science Questions. Res Sci Educ, 1-15.doi:10.1007/s11165-021-10009-7 online first
Zhuang, H., Xiao,Y. Liu, Q., Yu, B.,Xiong, J., & Bao, L. (2021) Comparisonof nature of science representations infive Chinese high school physics text-books. International Journal of Science Edu-cation. doi:10.1080/09500693.2021.1933647
13
hps&st newsletter may 2021
online first
Recent hps&st Related Books
Buchwald, Diana K. (Ed.) (2021). The CollectedPapers of Albert Einstein, Volume 16 (Document-ary Edition): The Berlin Years / Writings & Cor-respondence / June 1927–May 1929. Princeton,NJ: Princeton University Press. isbn: 978-0-691-21681-2
“During the period covered by this volume, Einsteinaims to discover whether one can derive the elec-tron’s equations of motion directly from the fieldequations of general relativity, and he embarks ona new approach to unified field theory founded onteleparallel geometry. On these topics, he engagesin exchanges with J. Grommer, C. Lanczos, and par-ticularly with C. H. Müntz, and corresponds withmathematicians like R. Weitzenböck and É. Cartan.
“Einstein attends what will be considered a historic1927 Solvay Conference where the new quantummechanics is discussed, but in fact he makes veryfew remarks. In an important prelude to his even-tual emigration to the United States, he is invited inSeptember 1927 to accept a research professorshipat Princeton University.
“Despite the sudden onset of a severe heart ail-ment in 1928, followed by an almost year-longperiod of convalescence, Einstein maintains a sus-tained engagement with scientific work, corres-pondence, and social and political issues. He pub-lishes many articles and interviews designed for apopular audience and continues various technicalpreoccupations, including publishing a patent fora novel “people’s” refrigerator and being intimatelyinvolved in the design of his famous sailboat.
“Einstein advocates for domestic legislative reform,gay and minority rights, European rapprochement,and conscientious objection to military service. Heresigns from his positions at the HebrewUniversity.
He also tries to avoid the fanfaremarking his fiftiethbirthday inMarch 1929 yet is “buried under a paperavalanche” from the tributes.
“His hiring of Helen Dukas as his assistant, whoaccompanies Einstein to the end of his life, is ofgreat significance for the ultimate preservation ofhis written legacy.” (From the Publisher)
More information available here.
Friendly, Michael & Wainer, Howard (2021). AHistory of Data Visualization and Graphic Com-munication. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.isbn: 978-0-674-97523-1
“With complex information everywhere, graphicshave become indispensable to our daily lives. Nav-igation apps show real-time, interactive traffic data.A colour-coded map of exit polls details electionballoting down to the county level. Charts com-municate stock market trends, government spend-ing, and the dangers of epidemics. AHistory of DataVisualisation and Graphic Communication tells thestory of how graphics left the exclusive confines ofscientific research and became ubiquitous. As datavisualisation spread, it changed the way we think.
“Michael Friendly and HowardWainer take us backto the beginnings of graphic communication in themid-seventeenth century, when the Dutch carto-grapher Michael Florent van Langren created thefirst chart of statistical data, which showed estimatesof the distance from Rome to Toledo. By 1786 Wil-liam Playfair had invented the line graph and barchart to explain trade imports and exports. In thenineteenth century, the “golden age” of data display,graphics found new uses in tracking disease out-breaks and understanding social issues. Friendlyand Wainer make the case that the explosion ingraphical communication both reinforced and wasadvanced by a cognitive revolution: visual thinking.
14
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
Across disciplines, people realised that informationcould be conveyed more effectively by visual dis-plays than by words or tables of numbers.
“Through stories and illustrations, A History ofData Visualization and Graphic Communica-tion details the 400-year evolution of an intellec-tual framework that has become essential to bothscience and society at large.” (From the Publisher)
More information available here.
Gordin, Michael D. (2021). On the Fringe: WhereScience Meets Pseudoscience. Oxford, UK: OxfordUniversity Press. isbn: 978-0-197-55576-7
“Everyone has heard of the term “pseudoscience”,typically used to describe something that looks likescience, but is somehow false, misleading, or un-proven. Many would be able to agree on a listof things that fall under its umbrella– astrology,phrenology, UFOlogy, creationism, and eugenicsmight come to mind. But defining what makesthese fields “pseudo” is a far more complex issue.It has proved impossible to come up with a simplecriterion that enables us to differentiate pseudos-cience from genuine science. Given the virulenceof contemporary disputes over the denial of climatechange and anti-vaccination movements–both ofwhich display allegations of ”pseudoscience” on allsides–there is a clear need to better understand is-sues of scientific demarcation.
“On the Fringe explores the philosophical and his-torical attempts to address this problem of demarc-ation. This book argues that by understanding doc-trines that are often seen as antithetical to science,we can learn a great deal about how science oper-ated in the past and does today. This explorationraises several questions: How does a doctrine be-come demonised as pseudoscientific? Who has theauthority to make these pronouncements? How isthe status of science shaped by political or cultural
contexts? How does pseudoscience differ from sci-entific fraud?
“Michael D. Gordin both answers these questionsand guides readers along a bewildering array ofmarginalised doctrines, looking at parapsychology(esp), Lysenkoism, scientific racism, and alchemy,among others, to better understand the struggle todefine what science is and is not, and how the con-troversies have shifted over the centuries. On theFringe provides a historical tour through many ofthese fringe fields in order to provide tools to thinkdeeply about scientific controversies both in thepast and in our present.” (From the Publisher)
More information available here.
Hüttemann, A. (2021). AMinimal Metaphysics forScientific Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press. isbn: 978-1-009-02354-2
“What are the metaphysical commitments whichbest ’make sense’ of our scientific practice (ratherthan our scientific theories)? In this book, AndreasHüttemann provides aminimalmetaphysics for sci-entific practice, i.e. a metaphysics that refrains frompostulating any structure that is explanatorily irrel-evant. Hüttemann closely analyses paradigmatic as-pects of scientific practice, such as prediction, ex-planation and manipulation, to consider the ques-tions whether and (if so) whatmetaphysical presup-positions best account for these practices. He looksat the role which scientific generalisation (laws ofnature) play in predicting, testing, and explainingthe behaviour of systems. He also develops a the-ory of causation in terms of quasi-inertial processesand interfering factors, and he proposes an accountof reductive practices that makes minimal meta-physical assumptions. His book will be valuablefor scholars and advanced students working in bothphilosophy of science and metaphysics.” (From thePublisher)
15
hps&st newsletter may 2021
More information available here.
Lyons, Timothy D., & and Peter Vickers (Eds.)(2021). Contemporary Scientific Realism: TheChallenge from the History of Science. Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.isbn: 978-0-190-94681-4
“Scientific realists claim we can justifiably believethat science is getting at the truth. However, theyhave faced historical challenges: various episodesacross history appear to demonstrate that evenstrongly supported scientific theories can be over-turned and left behind. In response, realists havedeveloped new positions and arguments. As a res-ult of specific challenges from the history of sci-ence, and realist responses, we find ourselves withan ever-increasing dataset bearing on the (possible)relationship between science and truth.
“The present volume introduces new historicalcases impacting the debate and advances the dis-cussion of cases that have only very recently beenintroduced. At the same time, shifts in philosoph-ical positions affect the very kind of case study thatis relevant. Thus, the historical work must proceedhand in hand with philosophical analysis of the dif-ferent positions and arguments in play. It is withthis inmind that the volume is divided into two sec-tions, entitled “Historical Cases for the Debate” and“Contemporary Scientific Realism.”
“All sides agree that historical cases are informativewith regard to how, or whether, science connectswith truth. Defying proclamations as early as the1980s announcing the death knell of the scientificrealism debate, here is that rare thing: a philo-sophical debate making steady and definite pro-gress. Moreover, the progress it is making con-cerns one of humanity’smost profound and import-ant questions: the relationship between science andtruth, or, put more boldly, the epistemic relationbetween humankind and the reality in which wefind ourselves.” (From the Publisher)
More information available here.
McGrath, Alister E. (2021). The Territories of Hu-man Reason: Science and Theology in an Age ofMultiple Rationalities. Oxford, UK: Oxford Uni-versity Press. isbn: 978-0-192-84568-9 [New inPaperback]
“Our understanding of human rationality haschanged significantly since the beginning of thecentury, with growing emphasis being placed onmultiple rationalities, each adapted to the specifictasks of communities of practice. We may thinkof the world as an ontological unity - but we usea plurality of methods to investigate and repres-ent this world. This development has called intoquestion both the appeal to a universal rationality,characteristic of the Enlightenment, and also thesimple ’modern-postmodern’ binary. The Territor-ies of Human Reason is the first major study to ex-plore the emergence of multiple situated rationalit-ies. It focuses on the relation of the natural sciencesand Christian theology, but its approach can easilybe extended to other disciplines. It provides a ro-bust intellectual framework for discussion of trans-disciplinarity, which has become a major theme inmany parts of the academic world.
“Alister E. McGrath offers a major reappraisal ofwhat it means to be ‘rational’ which will have sig-nificant impact on older discussions of this theme.He sets out to explore the consequences of theseemingly inexorable move away from the notionof a single universal rationality towards a plural-ity of cultural and domain-specific methodologiesand rationalities. What does this mean for the nat-ural sciences? For the philosophy of science? ForChristian theology? And for the interdisciplinaryfield of science and religion? How can a single in-dividual hold together scientific and religious ideas,when these arise from quite different rational ap-proaches? This ground-breaking volume sets out toengage these questions andwill provoke intense dis-
16
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
cussion and debate.” (From the Publisher)
More information available here.
Natale, Simone (2021). Deceitful Media: Artifi-cial Intelligence and Social Life after the Turing Test.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.isbn: 978-0-190-08037-2 [Paperback]
“Artificial intelligence (ai) is often discussed assomething extraordinary, a dream–or a nightmare–that awakensmetaphysical questions on human life.Yet far from a distant technology of the future, thetrue power of AI lies in its subtle revolution of or-dinary life. From voice assistants like Siri to nat-ural language processors, ai technologies use cul-tural biases and modern psychology to fit specificcharacteristics of how users perceive and navigatethe external world, thereby projecting the illusionof intelligence.
“Integrating media studies, science and tech-nology studies, and social psychology, DeceitfulMedia examines the rise of artificial intelligencethroughout history and exposes the very human fal-lacies behind this technology. Focusing specificallyon communicative ais, Natale argues that what wecall ”AI” is not a form of intelligence but rather areflection of the human user. Using the term ”banaldeception,” he reveals that deception forms the basisof all human-computer interactions rooted in AItechnologies, as technologies like voice assistantsutilise the dynamics of projection and stereotypingas a means for aligning with our existing habits andsocial conventions. By exploiting the human in-stinct to connect, AI reveals our collective vulner-abilities to deception, showing that what machinesare primarily changing is not other technology butourselves as humans.
“Deceitful Media illustrates how ai has continued atradition of technologies that mobilise our liabilityto deception and shows that only by better under-
standing our vulnerabilities to deception can we be-come more sophisticated consumers of interactivemedia” (From the Publisher)
More information available here.
Perillán, José G. (2021). Science Between Mythand History: The Quest for Common Ground andIts Importance for Scientific Practice. Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.isbn: 978-0-198-86496-7
“Scientists regularly employ historical narrative asa rhetorical tool in their communication of sci-ence, yet there’s been little reflection on its effectswithin scientific communities and beyond. ScienceBetween Myth and History begins to unravel thesethreads of influence. The stories scientists tell arenot just poorly researched scholarly histories, theyare myth-histories, a chimeric genre that bridgesdistinct narrative modes. This study goes beyondpolarising questions about who owns the historyof science and establishes a common ground fromwhich to better understand the messy and lastinglegacy of the stories scientists tell. It aims to stim-ulate vigorous conversation among science practi-tioners, scholars, and communicators.
“Scientific myth-histories undoubtedly delivervalue, coherence, and inspiration to their com-munities. They are tools used to broker scientificconsensus, resolve controversies, and navigatepower dynamics. Yet beyond the explicit intent andrationale behind their use, these narratives tendto have great rhetorical power and social agencythat bear unintended consequences. This bookunpacks the concept of myth-history and exploresfour case studies in which scientist storytellers usetheir narratives to teach, build consensus, and in-form the broader public. From geo-politically in-formed quantum interpretation debates to high-stakes gene-editing patent disputes, these case stud-
17
hps&st newsletter may 2021
ies illustrate the implications of storytelling in sci-ence.
“Science Between Myth and History calls on scient-ists not to eschew writing about their history, butto take more account of the stories they tell andthe image of science they project. In this time oferoding common ground, when many find them-selves dependent on, yet distrustful of scientific re-search, this book interrogates the effects of mis-matched, dissonant portraits of science.” (From thePublisher)
More information available here.
Sterelny, Kim (2021). The Pleistocene Social Con-tract: Culture and Cooperation in Human Evolu-tion. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.isbn: 978-0-197-53138-9
“Kim Sterelny here builds on his original ac-count of the evolutionary development and inter-action of human culture and cooperation, whichhe first presented in The Evolved Apprentice (2012).Sterelny sees human evolution not as hinging ona single key innovation, but as emerging from apositive feedback loop caused by smaller diver-gences from other great apes, including bipedal lo-comotion, better causal and social reasoning, repro-ductive cooperation, and changes in diet and for-aging style. He advances this argument in ThePleis-tocene Social Contract with four key claims aboutcooperation, culture, and their interaction in hu-man evolution.
“First, he proposes a new model of the evolution ofhuman cooperation. He suggests human coopera-tion began from a baseline that was probably similarto that of great apes, advancing about 1.8 millionyears ago to an initial phase of cooperative forging,in small mobile bands. Second, he then presents anovel account of the change in evolutionary dynam-ics of cooperation: from cooperation profits based
on collective action and mutualism, to profits basedon direct and indirect reciprocation over the courseof the Pleistocene. Third, he addresses the ques-tion of normative regulation, or moral norms, forband-scale cooperation, and connects it to the sta-bilisation of indirect reciprocation as a central as-pect of forager cooperation. Fourth, he developsan account of the emergence of inequality that linksinequality to intermediate levels of conflict and co-operation: a final phase of cooperation in larges-cale, hierarchical societies in the Holocene, begin-ning about 12,000 years ago.
“The Pleistocene Social Contract combines philo-sophy of biology with a reading of the archaeolo-gical and ethnographic record to present a newmodel of the evolution of human cooperation, cul-tural learning, and inequality.” (From the Pub-lisher)
More information available here.
Waide, Robert B., & Kingsland, Sharon E. (2021).The Challenges of Long Term Ecological Research:A Historical Analysis. Cham: Springer.isbn: 978-3-030-66935-5
“This volume explores the challenges of sustain-ing long-term ecological research through a his-torical analysis of the Long Term Ecological Re-search Program created by the U.S. National Sci-ence Foundation in 1980. The book examines reas-ons for the creation of the Program, an overviewof its 40-year history, and in-depth historical ana-lysis of selected sites. Themes explored include thebroader impact of this program on society, includ-ing its relevance to environmental policy and un-derstanding global climate change, the challengeof extending ecosystem ecology into urban envir-onments, and links to creative arts and humanit-ies projects. A major theme is the evolution of anew type of network science, involving compar-
18
may 2021 hps&st newsletter
ative studies, innovation in information manage-ment, creation of socio-ecological frameworks, de-velopment of governance structures, and formationof an International Long Term Ecological ResearchNetwork with worldwide reach. The book’s themeswill interest historians, philosophers and social sci-entists interested in ecological and environmentalsciences, as well as researchers across many discip-lines who are involved in long-term ecological re-search.” (From the Publisher)
More information available here.
Wray, K. (Ed.). (2021). Interpreting Kuhn: CriticalEssays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.isbn: 978-1-108-65320-6
“Interpreting Kuhn provides a comprehensive, up-to-date study ofThomas Kuhn’s philosophy and leg-acy. With twelve essays newly written by an inter-national group of scholars, it covers a wide range oftopics where Kuhn had an influence. Part I dealswith foundational issues such as Kuhn’s metaphys-ical assumptions, his relationship to Kant and Kan-tian philosophy, as well as contextual influences onhis writing, including Cold War psychology andart. Part II tackles three Kuhnian concepts: normalscience, incommensurability, and scientific revolu-tions. Part III deals with theCopernicanRevolutionin astronomy, the theory-ladenness of observation,scientific discovery, Kuhn’s evolutionary analogies,and his theoretical monism. The volume is an idealresource for advanced students seeking an overviewof Kuhn’s philosophy, and for specialists followingthe development of Kuhn scholarship.” (From thePublisher)
More information available here.
Authors of hps&st-related papers and booksare invited to bring them to attention ofPaulo Maurício or Nathan Oseroff-Spicer forinclusion in these sections.
Coming hps&st Related Confer-ences
June 4, 2021, Conceptual Change: Bridging theGap Between History and Philosophy of Science(hps) and Science Education, Utrecht UniversityInformation available here.
July 11-16, 2021, Biennial meeting of the Interna-tional Society for the History, Philosophy, and So-cial Studies of Biology, Milwaukee, WIDetails available here.
July 19-23, 2021 ’Objects of Understanding: His-torical Perspectives on Material Artefacts in Sci-ence Education’ will take place at the Europa-Universität Flensburg (Germany)Details: Roland Wittje, [email protected] here.
July 25-31, 2021, 26th International Congressof History of Science and Technology (dhst),Prague. (web conference)Information: https://www.ichst2021.org/
September 8-10, 2021 Conference, Société dephilosophie des sciences University of Mons, Bel-giumInquiries: AntoineBrandelet ([email protected])
July 3rd-7th, 2022, ihpst 16th International Con-ference, University of Calgary, CanadaDetails fromGlennDolphin: [email protected].
July 24-29, 2023, 17th dlmpst Congress, Univer-
19
hps&st newsletter may 2021
sity of Buenos Aires Information: Pablo Loren-zano, [email protected].
hps&st Related Organisations andWebsites
iuhpst – International Union of History, Philo-sophy, Science, and Technology
dlmpst – Division of Logic, Mathematics, Philo-sophy, Science, and Technology
dhst – Division of History, Science, and Techno-logy
ihpst – International History, Philosophy, andScience Teaching Group
narst – National Association for Research in Sci-ence Teaching
esera – European Science Education ResearchAssociation
asera – Australasian Science Education ResearchAssociation
icase – International Council of Associations forScience Education
unesco – Education
hss – History of Science Society
eshs – European Society for theHistory of Science
aha – American History Association
isheastme – International Society for the Historyof East Asian History of Science Technology andMedicine
bshs – British Society for History of Science
epsa – European Philosophy of Science Associ-ation
aahpsss - The Australasian Association for theHistory, Philosophy, and Social Studies of Science
hopos – International Society for the History ofPhilosophy of Science
psa – Philosophy of Science Association
bsps – The British Society for the Philosophy ofScience
spsp – The Society for Philosophy of Science inPractice
ishpsb – The International Society for the His-tory, Philosophy, and Social Studies of Biology
pes – The Philosophy of Education Society (USA)
The above list is updated and kept on the hps&stwebsite here.
hps&st-related organisations wishing their webpage to be added to the list should contact assistanteditor Paulo Maurício ([email protected])
The newsletter is typeset in XeLaTeX.The font is Minion Pro.The cover image is used with permission fromhttps://pixabay.com/, free for commercial use.
20