Organizers: Raimund Pils, Charlotte Werndl
Workshop Description
The central theme of the workshop is the connection between scientific discourse and societal outcomes. Through a series of sessions, participants will explore the influence of scientific language on public discourse, the link between philosophical stances and public policy measures, and the responsibilities that philosophers bear in education to integrate and reflect on scientific knowledge.
Schedule
| 15:30 – 16:05 | Charlotte Werndl (University of Salzburg) |
| 16:05 – 16:10 | Break |
| 16:10 – 16:45 | Raimund Pils (University of Salzburg) |
| 16:45 – 16:50 | Break |
| 16:50 – 17:25 | Benedikt Leitgeb (University of Salzburg) |
| 17:25 – 17:45 | Break |
| 17:45 – 18:20 | Bettina Bussmann (University of Salzburg) |
| 18:20 – 18:25 | Break |
| 18:25 – 19:00 | Anna Breitwieser (University of Salzburg) |
Abstracts
Charlotte Werndl (University of Salzburg)
Problems definitions in climate science, and their impact on public policy and science communication
This talk explores an example of definitions in climate science, namely the definition of climate and climate change. There are various challenges when these definition are used in public policy or when they are used to talk to the general public, and the talk will explore some of these challenges.
Raimund Pils (University of Salzburg)
From the scientific realism debate to public decision making
The scientific realism debate is traditionally viewed as a theoretical discussion about the interpretation of scientific theories. This talk explores whether there is a rational link between one’s view on the reality of unobservable entities and one’s social behavior. The concern is with very tangible behavior such as whether there is a rational pathway from one’s realist or anti-realist views on viruses and their transmission mechanisms to one’s public health responses. The implicit received view suggests that no such link exists. It is based on the general agreement between realists and anti-realists regarding the empirical adequacy of our best scientific theories. I argue, however, that this received view is wrong.
Benedikt Leitgeb (University of Salzburg)
On the Possibility of Group Experts
“Groups perform many functions traditionally performed by individual experts. This talk will explore the possibility and feasibility of ‘group experts’. I will argue that it is possible, under certain assumptions, for groups to rise to the level of experts, independent of the expertise of their members. However, I will argue that given a common assumption about a condition of expertise, that experts hold many true beliefs, it is unlikely that many groups will reach this level. Rather than dismissing group expertise, however, this should lead us to rethink the concept of expert itself.”
Bettina Bussmann (University of Salzburg)
Epistemic responsibility in teacher education
Philosophy and ethics teachers generally work with philosophy textbooks that either completely exclude empirical findings or only integrate them for specific philosophical purposes. Empirically-informed or even interdisciplinary philosophising remains a rarity in university teacher training – even though curricula and international education plans have been calling for this for a long time.
I will present a paradigm case of integrating empirical findings that are supposed to produce well-founded philosophical judgements. I will call this case the unreflected delivery function of empirical findings and show how this integration makes well-founded judgments difficult and even hinders them. Cases like these lack the awareness of epistemic responsibility.
In order for the teaching of philosophy and ethics to fulfil its epistemic responsibility, I suggest that domain-specific epistemic norms should be developed and discussed. I will propose two epistemic norms and also show how to facilitate empirically-informed and interdisciplinary learning by means of specific learning materials.
Anna Breitwieser (University of Salzburg)
Philosophy’s key role in bridging science integration and reflection through dialogue
Current educational goals require that teachers pursue science integration (goal of science integration, as emphasized internationally by the OECD, UNESCO and nationally by the BMBWF) and that students are equipped with the skills and knowledge to critically evaluate knowledge and science (goal of science reflection, as emphasized in the current PISA study OECD 2024). However, these two goals are often promoted and pursued independently. This separation is also evident in philosophy education, as an analysis of several philosophy textbooks demonstrates. In my talk, I will first explain why it is problematic to pursue the integration and reflection of science separately. Then, drawing on psychological research (e.g. Sinatra & Hofer, 2021), I will illustrate why science integration and reflection should be linked. The presentation concludes with a proposal for bridging science integration and reflection through a science-oriented dialogue (based on Bussmann 2014-2024), supported by concrete examples from practice.
Funding
This workshop is part of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [10.55776/COE3] funded project Cluster of Excellence – Knowledge in Crisis. https://www.knowledgeincrisis.com/
SOPhiA 2026 