Inconsistency in Factual Science
Workshop organized by Luis Felipe Bartolo Alegre, UNMSM: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Perú
Workshop organized by Luis Felipe Bartolo Alegre, UNMSM: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Perú
Traditional epistemology has always rejected inconsistency on the grounds of the ex contradictione quodlibet (ECQ) logical principle. Since by ECQ, any proposition would follow from a contradiction, an inconsistent science would be uninformative and useless. Paraconsistent logics, by restricting ECQ, make it possible that at least some inconsistent science be not useless in this sense. Moreover, scholars like da Costa and Priest have even defended the possibility of corroborating contradictory propositions about the world.
Traditional epistemology has always rejected inconsistency on the grounds of the ex contradictione quodlibet (ECQ) logical principle. Since by ECQ, any proposition would follow from a contradiction, an inconsistent science would be uninformative and useless. Paraconsistent logics, by restricting ECQ, make it possible that at least some inconsistent science be not useless in this sense. Moreover, scholars like da Costa and Priest have even defended the possibility of corroborating contradictory propositions about the world.
In this workshop we discuss the problem that inconsistency poses to factual/empirical science, and what would it mean to accept inconsistent science. This includes the three types of inconsistency advanced by Gotesky, Bartelborth and Priest: i.e. inconsistencies (i) between a theory and data, (ii) between two different theories, and (iii) internal to a theory.
In this workshop we discuss the problem that inconsistency poses to factual/empirical science, and what would it mean to accept inconsistent science. This includes the three types of inconsistency advanced by Gotesky, Bartelborth and Priest: i.e. inconsistencies (i) between a theory and data, (ii) between two different theories, and (iii) internal to a theory.
KEYNOTE SPEAKERS
KEYNOTE SPEAKERS
SCHEDULE
SCHEDULE
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019 MORNING
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019 MORNING
- 09h30 9h45 INTRODUCTION: Luis Felipe Bartolo Alegre (UNMSM), "A map of the research on IiFS"
- 09h30 9h45 INTRODUCTION: Luis Felipe Bartolo Alegre (UNMSM), "A map of the research on IiFS"
- 9h45 10h30 KEYNOTE TALK: María del Rosario Martínez-Ordaz (UNAM/UFRJ), "The ignorance behind inconsistency toleration"
- 9h45 10h30 KEYNOTE TALK: María del Rosario Martínez-Ordaz (UNAM/UFRJ), "The ignorance behind inconsistency toleration"
- 10h30 11h00 Francisco Doria (UFRJ), "Incompleteness in empirical sciences"
- 10h30 11h00 Francisco Doria (UFRJ), "Incompleteness in empirical sciences"
- 11h00 11h30 COFFEE BREAK
- 11h00 11h30 COFFEE BREAK
- 11h30 12h00 Ingolf Max (AML), "Types of inconsistencies in multi-dimensional logics and a linguistic application"
- 11h30 12h00 Ingolf Max (AML), "Types of inconsistencies in multi-dimensional logics and a linguistic application"
- 12h00 12h30 Paul Femenia (UNSJ), "Determination of inconsistency of a search engine through the amount of entries: Proposed solution"
- 12h00 12h30 Paul Femenia (UNSJ), "Determination of inconsistency of a search engine through the amount of entries: Proposed solution"
- 12h30 13h00 Daniele Mundici (UniFI), "Consistent and inconsistent probability"
- 12h30 13h00 Daniele Mundici (UniFI), "Consistent and inconsistent probability"
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019 AFTERNOON
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019 AFTERNOON
- 14h30 15h15 KEYNOTE TALK: Andrés Bobenrieth (University of Valparaiso, Chile), "Talking about whether the world is contradictory or not is, at least, a categorical mistake: Bases for an antirealistic stand about inconsistencies"
- 14h30 15h15 KEYNOTE TALK: Andrés Bobenrieth (University of Valparaiso, Chile), "Talking about whether the world is contradictory or not is, at least, a categorical mistake: Bases for an antirealistic stand about inconsistencies"
CALL FOR PAPERS. WE INVITE SUBMISSIONS OF PROPOSALS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED, TO:
CALL FOR PAPERS. WE INVITE SUBMISSIONS OF PROPOSALS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED, TO:
- Historical or logical studies of (allegedly) inconsistent factual theories
- Historical or logical studies of (allegedly) inconsistent factual theories
- Historical or logical studies of (allegedly) inconsistent technical or formal theories with applications to factual science
- Historical or logical studies of (allegedly) inconsistent technical or formal theories with applications to factual science
- The logical possibility of inconsistent factual theories
- The logical possibility of inconsistent factual theories
- The problem of testing inconsistent factual theories
- The problem of testing inconsistent factual theories
- Acceptance and rejection of inconsistent factual theories
- Acceptance and rejection of inconsistent factual theories
- Types of inconsistency in factual science
- Types of inconsistency in factual science
with subject creativity:abstract. Indicate your name, title of the contribution and affiliation in the email body. Answers to proposals are going to be given within three days after submission.
with subject creativity:abstract. Indicate your name, title of the contribution and affiliation in the email body. Answers to proposals are going to be given within three days after submission.
Abstracts are welcome in Portuguese, English, Spanish and French, which are the official languages of the event. However, abstracts in German and Italian are also welcome in the evaluation phase, provided the final abstract and lecture are in any of the official languages
Abstracts are welcome in Portuguese, English, Spanish and French, which are the official languages of the event. However, abstracts in German and Italian are also welcome in the evaluation phase, provided the final abstract and lecture are in any of the official languages