Laszlo Kosolosky | Ghent University (original) (raw)

Papers by Laszlo Kosolosky

The aim of this paper is to present some of the key aspects of rationality underlying the context... more The aim of this paper is to present some of the key aspects of rationality underlying the context of theory pursuit.To this end we propose a unifying pattern of pursuit worthiness:“It is rational for Yto pursue X if and only if pursuing X is conducive of the set of goals Z.”By showing in which ways variables X,Y, and Z can be changed, we present different notions of pursuit and pursuit worthiness.With respect to variable X, we distinguish the pursuit of scientific theories, epistemic objects, and technological developments.With respect to variable Z, we distinguish
between epistemic and practical pursuit worthiness.Finally, with respect to variable Y, we distinguish between individual and communal pursuit worthiness.By means of these distinctions we are able to explicate some of the major ambiguities underlying the concept of pursuit of pursuit worthiness, as well as to shed light on some confusions in philosophical literature that have resulted from their neglect.

We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distr... more We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distrustful information transmissions. The semantics of such relations is analysed in view of rules that define the behaviour of a receiving agent. We justify this approach in view of human agent communications and secure system design. We further specify some properties of such relations.

Springer book chapter

In this paper, we shed new light on the epistemic struggle between establishing consensus and ack... more In this paper, we shed new light on the epistemic struggle between establishing consensus and acknowledging plurality, by explicating different ways of consensus-making in science and society and examining the impact hereof on their field of intersection, i.e. consensus conferences (in particular those organized by the National Institute of Health). We draw a distinction between, what we call, academic and interface consensus, to capture the wide appeal to consensus in existing literature. We investigate such accounts -i.e. Solomon , and Miller (2013) -as to put forth a new understanding of consensus-making, focusing on the meta-consensus. We further defend how (NIH) consensus conferences enable epistemic work, through demands of epistemic adequacy and contestability, contrary to the claim that consensus conferences miss a window for epistemic opportunity . Paying attention to this dynamics surrounding consensus, moreover allows us to illustrate how the public understanding of science and the public use of the ideal of consensus could be well modified.

Science and engineering ethics

We live in a world in which scientific expertise and its epistemic authority become more importan... more We live in a world in which scientific expertise and its epistemic authority become more important. On the other hand, the financial interests in research, which could potentially corrupt science, are increasing. Due to these two tendencies, a concern for the integrity of scientific research becomes increasingly vital. This concern is, however, hollow if we do not have a clear account of research integrity. Therefore, it is important that we explicate this concept. Following Rudolf Carnap's characterization of the task of explication, this means that we should develop a concept that is (1) similar to our common sense notion of research integrity, (2) exact, (3) fruitful, and (4) as simple as possible. Since existing concepts do not meet these four requirements, we develop a new concept in this article. We describe a concept of epistemic integrity that is based on the property of deceptiveness, and argue that this concept does meet Carnap's four requirements of explication. To illustrate and support our claims we use several examples from scientific practice, mainly from biomedical research.

Accountability in research

Logique & Analyse

We offer several new arguments for the view that existing research agendas in the health sciences... more We offer several new arguments for the view that existing research agendas in the health sciences and the agricultural sciences are morally deficient. More specifically, the following kinds of distortion of the agenda are discussed: in the health sciences, the health problems of the poor are more or less neglected, as well as non-medicinal solutions to health problems, and in the agricultural sciences, insufficient attention is paid to agroecology. We justify the claim that these three kinds of distortion are problematic on ethical grounds, showing that they are moral failures. Instead of starting from one ethical theory to show this, we present different ethical justifications, based on different ethical theories (Bentham's utilitarianism, Rawls's theory of justice, Pogge's rights-based account of minimal justice, Kitcher's ethical theory, and classical liberalism). This should make our conclusion (i.e. that the distorted research agendas in the health sciences and the agricultural sciences pose a moral problem) at least initially convincing to adherents of different ethical theories.

Journal for general philosophy of science

An error in the Fourth Assessment Report (2007) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ... more An error in the Fourth Assessment Report (2007) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which wrongly predicted the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers by 2035, fueled doubts about the authority, honesty and rigor of the IPCC as a leading institution in climate science and, correspondingly, raised questions about whether global warming is anything more than a hoax put forward by environmentalists. The late and confusing reaction of the IPCC to these allegations only worsened the matter. By comparing assessment reports issued by the IPCC, this paper asks the question: 'Why, despite extensive peer review, did the Himalayan glacier melting rate error get published?' I chronicle exactly what happened (section 3), consider why it happened as it did (section 4), and show how these answers require us to rethink the concept of 'peer review' in scientific practice. I also identify several future directions for peer review (section 5) if it wants to stay ahead of the game, bearing in mind the forthcoming IPCC Assessment Reports.

The Reasoner

A scientific survey on fraud in academic medical research in Flanders, of which the results were ... more A scientific survey on fraud in academic medical research in Flanders, of which the results were recently published in popular science magazine Eos, has caused tumult in the Flemish academic community. The reason is that these results suggest that scientific fraud (which could indirectly cause ill health and death among patients) is not as rare as earlier estimates indicate. Malpractices are primarily attributed to the pressure to publish. In this piece, we elaborate on the content of the study and pave the way for reform.

Philosophica

The aim of this paper is to disambiguate between different notions of pursuit worthiness regardin... more The aim of this paper is to disambiguate between different notions of pursuit worthiness regarding scientific inquiries. To this end we propose a unifying pattern of pursuit worthiness: "It is rational for Y to pursue X if and only if pursuing X is conducive of the set of goals Z." By showing in which ways variables X, Y, and Z can be changed, we present different notions of pursuit and pursuit worthiness. With respect to variable X, we distinguish the pursuit of scientific theories, epistemic objects, and technological developments. With respect to variable Z, we distinguish between epistemic and practical pursuit worthiness. Finally, with respect to variable Y, we distinguish between individual and communal pursuit worthiness. By means of these distinctions we are able to explicate some of the major ambiguities underlying the concept of pursuit of pursuit worthiness, as well as to shed light on some confusions in philosophical literature that have resulted from their neglect.

Topoi

We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distr... more We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distrustful information transmissions. The semantics of such relations is analysed in view of rules that define the behaviour of a receiving agent. We justify this approach in view of human agent communications and secure system design. We further specify some properties of such relations.

Foundations of science

The aim of this issue is to bring together two philosophical disciplines, i.e. social epistemolog... more The aim of this issue is to bring together two philosophical disciplines, i.e. social epistemology and philosophy of the humanities, that have been dealing with the same topic: the relation between science and its social context.

The 2nd Copenhagen conference in …, Jan 1, 2010

Ghent University Ghent University Academic Bibliography. ...

'Science versus democracy?'workshop, Abstracts, Jan 1, 2011

ABSTRACT: Worldwide matters of concern, such as climate change and the economic crisis, have show... more ABSTRACT: Worldwide matters of concern, such as climate change and the economic crisis, have shown that science is not an isle in society, where scientists should (solely) pursue science for its own sake. The underlying value-free ideal of science is a hot topic of debate ...

Third biennial conference of the society for …, Jan 1, 2011

In this paper, I propose a way to grapple consensus driven motivations that are apparent in many ... more In this paper, I propose a way to grapple consensus driven motivations that are apparent in many sciences-ie climate science, medical science and psychology-resulting in either consensus conferences, meta-analysis or something in between. My research will focus ...

Society for applied …, Jan 1, 2010

Abstract Physicians are often seen as experts (or authorities) in a medical diagnostic process. M... more Abstract Physicians are often seen as experts (or authorities) in a medical diagnostic process. Medical researchers are interested in how authority works in medicine. Philosophers have argued that scientific, moral, or almost all knowledge depends for its ...

Second young researchers days & workshop on the …, Jan 1, 2010

... consensus formation. Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: Record Details.... more ... consensus formation. Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: Record Details. Record ID, 1862209. Record Type, conference. Author, Laszlo Kosolosky [002005252506] - Ghent University Laszlo.Kosolosky@UGent.be. ...

THE REASONER, Jan 1, 2011

On the 10th of June, the Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science (Ghent University, Belgium) o... more On the 10th of June, the Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science (Ghent University, Belgium) organized a one-day workshop, 'Science versus Democracy?', on the relation(s) between Science and Democracy (http://logica.ugent.be/centrum). In light of the commotion ...

Three rivers philosophy conference 2011: science, …, Jan 1, 2011

I argue that Miriam Solomon fails to show that “(medical) consensus conferences miss the intended... more I argue that Miriam Solomon fails to show that “(medical) consensus conferences miss the intended window of epistemic opportunity”(Solomon, 2007: 170), and thus typically take place after the experts have reached consensus. This is done, on the one hand, by ...

1st Dutch-Flemish graduate conference on …, Jan 1, 2010

... Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: Record Details. Record ID, 1862215. ... more ... Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: Record Details. Record ID, 1862215. Record Type, conference. Author, Laszlo Kosolosky [002005252506] - Ghent UniversityLaszlo.Kosolosky@UGent.be. Title, Scientific consensus : what does it entail? ...

The aim of this paper is to present some of the key aspects of rationality underlying the context... more The aim of this paper is to present some of the key aspects of rationality underlying the context of theory pursuit.To this end we propose a unifying pattern of pursuit worthiness:“It is rational for Yto pursue X if and only if pursuing X is conducive of the set of goals Z.”By showing in which ways variables X,Y, and Z can be changed, we present different notions of pursuit and pursuit worthiness.With respect to variable X, we distinguish the pursuit of scientific theories, epistemic objects, and technological developments.With respect to variable Z, we distinguish
between epistemic and practical pursuit worthiness.Finally, with respect to variable Y, we distinguish between individual and communal pursuit worthiness.By means of these distinctions we are able to explicate some of the major ambiguities underlying the concept of pursuit of pursuit worthiness, as well as to shed light on some confusions in philosophical literature that have resulted from their neglect.

We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distr... more We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distrustful information transmissions. The semantics of such relations is analysed in view of rules that define the behaviour of a receiving agent. We justify this approach in view of human agent communications and secure system design. We further specify some properties of such relations.

Springer book chapter

In this paper, we shed new light on the epistemic struggle between establishing consensus and ack... more In this paper, we shed new light on the epistemic struggle between establishing consensus and acknowledging plurality, by explicating different ways of consensus-making in science and society and examining the impact hereof on their field of intersection, i.e. consensus conferences (in particular those organized by the National Institute of Health). We draw a distinction between, what we call, academic and interface consensus, to capture the wide appeal to consensus in existing literature. We investigate such accounts -i.e. Solomon , and Miller (2013) -as to put forth a new understanding of consensus-making, focusing on the meta-consensus. We further defend how (NIH) consensus conferences enable epistemic work, through demands of epistemic adequacy and contestability, contrary to the claim that consensus conferences miss a window for epistemic opportunity . Paying attention to this dynamics surrounding consensus, moreover allows us to illustrate how the public understanding of science and the public use of the ideal of consensus could be well modified.

Science and engineering ethics

We live in a world in which scientific expertise and its epistemic authority become more importan... more We live in a world in which scientific expertise and its epistemic authority become more important. On the other hand, the financial interests in research, which could potentially corrupt science, are increasing. Due to these two tendencies, a concern for the integrity of scientific research becomes increasingly vital. This concern is, however, hollow if we do not have a clear account of research integrity. Therefore, it is important that we explicate this concept. Following Rudolf Carnap's characterization of the task of explication, this means that we should develop a concept that is (1) similar to our common sense notion of research integrity, (2) exact, (3) fruitful, and (4) as simple as possible. Since existing concepts do not meet these four requirements, we develop a new concept in this article. We describe a concept of epistemic integrity that is based on the property of deceptiveness, and argue that this concept does meet Carnap's four requirements of explication. To illustrate and support our claims we use several examples from scientific practice, mainly from biomedical research.

Accountability in research

Logique & Analyse

We offer several new arguments for the view that existing research agendas in the health sciences... more We offer several new arguments for the view that existing research agendas in the health sciences and the agricultural sciences are morally deficient. More specifically, the following kinds of distortion of the agenda are discussed: in the health sciences, the health problems of the poor are more or less neglected, as well as non-medicinal solutions to health problems, and in the agricultural sciences, insufficient attention is paid to agroecology. We justify the claim that these three kinds of distortion are problematic on ethical grounds, showing that they are moral failures. Instead of starting from one ethical theory to show this, we present different ethical justifications, based on different ethical theories (Bentham's utilitarianism, Rawls's theory of justice, Pogge's rights-based account of minimal justice, Kitcher's ethical theory, and classical liberalism). This should make our conclusion (i.e. that the distorted research agendas in the health sciences and the agricultural sciences pose a moral problem) at least initially convincing to adherents of different ethical theories.

Journal for general philosophy of science

An error in the Fourth Assessment Report (2007) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ... more An error in the Fourth Assessment Report (2007) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which wrongly predicted the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers by 2035, fueled doubts about the authority, honesty and rigor of the IPCC as a leading institution in climate science and, correspondingly, raised questions about whether global warming is anything more than a hoax put forward by environmentalists. The late and confusing reaction of the IPCC to these allegations only worsened the matter. By comparing assessment reports issued by the IPCC, this paper asks the question: 'Why, despite extensive peer review, did the Himalayan glacier melting rate error get published?' I chronicle exactly what happened (section 3), consider why it happened as it did (section 4), and show how these answers require us to rethink the concept of 'peer review' in scientific practice. I also identify several future directions for peer review (section 5) if it wants to stay ahead of the game, bearing in mind the forthcoming IPCC Assessment Reports.

The Reasoner

A scientific survey on fraud in academic medical research in Flanders, of which the results were ... more A scientific survey on fraud in academic medical research in Flanders, of which the results were recently published in popular science magazine Eos, has caused tumult in the Flemish academic community. The reason is that these results suggest that scientific fraud (which could indirectly cause ill health and death among patients) is not as rare as earlier estimates indicate. Malpractices are primarily attributed to the pressure to publish. In this piece, we elaborate on the content of the study and pave the way for reform.

Philosophica

The aim of this paper is to disambiguate between different notions of pursuit worthiness regardin... more The aim of this paper is to disambiguate between different notions of pursuit worthiness regarding scientific inquiries. To this end we propose a unifying pattern of pursuit worthiness: "It is rational for Y to pursue X if and only if pursuing X is conducive of the set of goals Z." By showing in which ways variables X, Y, and Z can be changed, we present different notions of pursuit and pursuit worthiness. With respect to variable X, we distinguish the pursuit of scientific theories, epistemic objects, and technological developments. With respect to variable Z, we distinguish between epistemic and practical pursuit worthiness. Finally, with respect to variable Y, we distinguish between individual and communal pursuit worthiness. By means of these distinctions we are able to explicate some of the major ambiguities underlying the concept of pursuit of pursuit worthiness, as well as to shed light on some confusions in philosophical literature that have resulted from their neglect.

Topoi

We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distr... more We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distrustful information transmissions. The semantics of such relations is analysed in view of rules that define the behaviour of a receiving agent. We justify this approach in view of human agent communications and secure system design. We further specify some properties of such relations.

Foundations of science

The aim of this issue is to bring together two philosophical disciplines, i.e. social epistemolog... more The aim of this issue is to bring together two philosophical disciplines, i.e. social epistemology and philosophy of the humanities, that have been dealing with the same topic: the relation between science and its social context.

The 2nd Copenhagen conference in …, Jan 1, 2010

Ghent University Ghent University Academic Bibliography. ...

'Science versus democracy?'workshop, Abstracts, Jan 1, 2011

ABSTRACT: Worldwide matters of concern, such as climate change and the economic crisis, have show... more ABSTRACT: Worldwide matters of concern, such as climate change and the economic crisis, have shown that science is not an isle in society, where scientists should (solely) pursue science for its own sake. The underlying value-free ideal of science is a hot topic of debate ...

Third biennial conference of the society for …, Jan 1, 2011

In this paper, I propose a way to grapple consensus driven motivations that are apparent in many ... more In this paper, I propose a way to grapple consensus driven motivations that are apparent in many sciences-ie climate science, medical science and psychology-resulting in either consensus conferences, meta-analysis or something in between. My research will focus ...

Society for applied …, Jan 1, 2010

Abstract Physicians are often seen as experts (or authorities) in a medical diagnostic process. M... more Abstract Physicians are often seen as experts (or authorities) in a medical diagnostic process. Medical researchers are interested in how authority works in medicine. Philosophers have argued that scientific, moral, or almost all knowledge depends for its ...

Second young researchers days & workshop on the …, Jan 1, 2010

... consensus formation. Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: Record Details.... more ... consensus formation. Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: Record Details. Record ID, 1862209. Record Type, conference. Author, Laszlo Kosolosky [002005252506] - Ghent University Laszlo.Kosolosky@UGent.be. ...

THE REASONER, Jan 1, 2011

On the 10th of June, the Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science (Ghent University, Belgium) o... more On the 10th of June, the Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science (Ghent University, Belgium) organized a one-day workshop, 'Science versus Democracy?', on the relation(s) between Science and Democracy (http://logica.ugent.be/centrum). In light of the commotion ...

Three rivers philosophy conference 2011: science, …, Jan 1, 2011

I argue that Miriam Solomon fails to show that “(medical) consensus conferences miss the intended... more I argue that Miriam Solomon fails to show that “(medical) consensus conferences miss the intended window of epistemic opportunity”(Solomon, 2007: 170), and thus typically take place after the experts have reached consensus. This is done, on the one hand, by ...

1st Dutch-Flemish graduate conference on …, Jan 1, 2010

... Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: Record Details. Record ID, 1862215. ... more ... Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: Record Details. Record ID, 1862215. Record Type, conference. Author, Laszlo Kosolosky [002005252506] - Ghent UniversityLaszlo.Kosolosky@UGent.be. Title, Scientific consensus : what does it entail? ...