BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//CEFISES @ UCLouvain - ECPv6.15.20//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:CEFISES @ UCLouvain
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://cefises.be
X-WR-CALDESC:Évènements pour CEFISES @ UCLouvain
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Brussels
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20250330T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20251026T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20260329T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20261025T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20270328T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20271031T010000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260206T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260206T160000
DTSTAMP:20260428T005820
CREATED:20250916T192815Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260308T094258Z
UID:1991-1770386400-1770393600@cefises.be
SUMMARY:CEFISES Seminar: Samuel Descarreaux\, "Neo-Kantian Epistemology and Pragmatic Naturalization: The Case of Hermann von Helmholtz"
DESCRIPTION:Livestream  https://youtu.be/2IzOrLvz85E \nSeries: MEPHISTO (MEtaphysics and PHIlosophy of Science: Transcendental Orientations) \nSpeaker: Samuel Descarreaux  (Université de Liège\, Belgium – Ruhr-Universität Bochum\, Germany) \nTitle: « Neo-Kantian Epistemology and Pragmatic Naturalization: The Case of Hermann von Helmholtz » \nAbstract \nThis talk examines how the Vienna Circle’s distinction between the context of justification and the context of discovery informs Michael Friedman’s interpretation of Hermann von Helmholtz’s nineteenth-century neo-Kantian epistemology and —drawing on Sami Pihlström’s work— proposes an alternative model of transcendental naturalism as a “pragmatically naturalized transcendental epistemology”. After introducing the anti-metaphysical Viennese distinction— commonly attributed to Hans Reichenbach—I argue that Michael Friedman’s reading of Helmholtz\, centered on the problematic geometrical definition of the free mobility of rigid bodies\, maintains a principled separation between the reality of external objects\, shaped by human psychophysical dispositions\, and scientific objectivity. The latter depends on the strict conformity between standards of measurement and the magnitudes measured\, on causality as a regulative condition for the comprehensibility of nature\, and on a practical choice among different equipossible ontological frameworks. \nIn response\, I develop a broader pragmatically naturalized transcendental interpretation of Helmholtz\, grounded in a naturalized epistemology that carries forward Kant’s critical and constructivist project from within the epistemic constraints of scientific practice and human psychophysical embeddedness. These constraints\, which require revising the fixed\, necessary\, and universal Kantian a priori of categories and cognitive faculties\, frame a functionalist account of cognition—manifest in Helmholtz’s theory of sign perception and unconscious predictive inference—as a system of practical\, goal-directed adaptive mechanisms that presuppose causality as a trustworthy regulative condition of possibility. The view thus combines empirical realism regarding the external constructed world with transcendental dependence on the conditions of cognition and conceptual practices\, making it “practice-oriented enough to be ‘pragmatist’ and condition-oriented enough to be ‘transcendental’” . Therefore\, my study resituates Friedman’s interpretation of Helmholtz’s physical geometry within a pragmatic horizon—one that remains critical of anti-metaphysical positions. From this vantage point\, a long-overdue rapprochement between the early nineteenth-century proponents of a “return to Kant” and contemporary analytic Kantianism becomes not only possible but philosophically fruitful. \n  \n 
URL:https://cefises.be/fr/evenement/cefises-seminar-6-feb/
LOCATION:Salle Ladrière\, Place du Cardinal Mercier 14 (bâtiment Socrate\, a.124)\, Louvain-la-Neuve\, 1348\, Belgium
ORGANIZER;CN="Danielle Pizzocaro":MAILTO:daniele.pizzocaro@uclouvain.be
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260213T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260213T160000
DTSTAMP:20260428T005820
CREATED:20250916T192716Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260212T213253Z
UID:1988-1770991200-1770998400@cefises.be
SUMMARY:[CANCELLED] CEFISES Seminar: Laurent Loison\, "Critical presentism: step 2"
DESCRIPTION:Due to unforeseen circumstances\, this event has been unfortunately cancelled.  \nWe will try to reschedule to a later date. \n  \n  \n  \nLivestream  https://www.youtube.com/@CEFISES \nSeries: HPS \nSpeaker: Laurent Loison (IHPST Paris) \nTitle: « Critical presentism: step 2 » \nAbstract \nIn an article written about ten years ago\, when I was a postdoc\, I offered a critical assessment of the largely dominant anti-presentist stance in the history of science (Loison 2016). While taking care to avoid any form of anachronism\, present-day science can (and indeed must) be a major resource in understanding the past. Programmatically\, I referred to this propulsive dialectic between the past and the present as “critical presentism\,” without seeking to reify this attitude in the form of a method. Since then\, I have had several opportunities to put this form of critical presentism into practice in a very concrete way\, particularly through extensive collaborations with biologists. In this presentation\, I will revisit one of these collaborations\, showing how it has been beneficial both to history (Loison 2025) and to science (Lambert et al. 2025). In doing so\, it becomes clear that the present can legitimately be included in the context necessary for elucidating the past. \nReferences \nLambert Amaury\, Achaz Guillaume\, Le Rouzic Arnaud\, Loison Laurent\, 2025\, “The Baldwin effect reloaded: Intermediate levels of phenotypic plasticity favor evolutionary rescue”\, The American Naturalist\, 206/5\, pp. 418-434\, 10.1086/737198. \nLoison Laurent\, 2025\, Beyond Lamarckism. Plasticity in Darwinian Evolution\, 1890-1970\, London & New York\, Routledge\, 298 pages. \nLoison Laurent\, 2016\, “Forms of presentism in the history of science. Rethinking the project of historical epistemology”\, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science\, A\, 60\, pp. 29-37\, 10.1016/j.shpsa.2016.09.002.
URL:https://cefises.be/fr/evenement/cefises-seminar-13-feb/
LOCATION:Salle Ladrière\, Place du Cardinal Mercier 14 (bâtiment Socrate\, a.124)\, Louvain-la-Neuve\, 1348\, Belgium
ORGANIZER;CN="Max Bautista-Perpiny%C3%A0":MAILTO:max.bautista@uclouvain.be
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260220T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260220T160000
DTSTAMP:20260428T005820
CREATED:20250916T192605Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260215T202317Z
UID:1985-1771596000-1771603200@cefises.be
SUMMARY:CEFISES Seminar: Jan Heylen\, “‘The president’ and ‘that woman’: Partial free logic and its rivals”
DESCRIPTION:Livestream  https://www.youtube.com/@CEFISES \nSeries: Work-in-Progress \nSpeaker: Jan Heylen (KU Leuven) \nTitle: “‘The president’ and ‘that woman’: Partial free logic and its rivals” \nAbstract \nPartialists hold that many utterances semantically determine partial\, rather than full propositions. These partial\, semantically determined propositions serve as inputs to pragmatic processes that result in full propositions. We here provide a treatment of the logical attributes of sets of partial propositions\, and arguments that include partial propositions\, where these logical attributes serve as inputs to pragmatic processes in an analogous way. We focus on one source of partiality: non-denoting terms like definite descriptions and complex demonstratives. Our formal semantics is based on two principles: no-input-no-output and input-classical-output\, resulting in a principled and elegant system with denotation\, satisfaction\, and truth gaps. This partial free logic differs from negative\, positive and neutral free logics and introduces the conceptual novelty of validity and consistency gaps. Sentences with non-denoting terms are never logical truths or falsities\, but arguments with such sentences can be valid or invalid and sets of such sentences can be consistent. Our framework avoids the need for an error theory about ordinary discourse involving non-denoting terms\, and the pragmatic processes of completion do not need to be conceptualised as processes whereby pragmatics overrules semantics.
URL:https://cefises.be/fr/evenement/cefises-seminar-20-feb/
LOCATION:Salle Ladrière\, Place du Cardinal Mercier 14 (bâtiment Socrate\, a.124)\, Louvain-la-Neuve\, 1348\, Belgium
ORGANIZER;CN="Alexandre Guay":MAILTO:alexandre.guay@uclouvain.be
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260227T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260227T160000
DTSTAMP:20260428T005820
CREATED:20250916T192452Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260308T185445Z
UID:1982-1772200800-1772208000@cefises.be
SUMMARY:CEFISES Seminar: Vincent Grandjean\, "Indeterminate Personal Identity"
DESCRIPTION:Livestream  https://youtu.be/P9zFMhw0yPc \nSeries: OLOFOS \nSpeaker: Vincent Grandjean (University of Neuchatel) \nTitle: « Indeterminate Personal Identity » \nAbstract \nIn this paper\, I discuss a prominent objection to psychological accounts of personal identity over time: the fission objection. I argue that a specific approach to this objection\, involving a type of metaphysical indeterminacy\, has been overlooked in previous literature. This approach allows for the preservation of the commonly held belief that psychological continuity serves as the criterion for diachronic personal identity\, without separating survival from identity or resorting to multiple-occupancy. Specifically\, I suggest that a person before fission is identical to one of the two resulting persons after fission\, but it is indeterminate which one. Contrarily to previous claims\, this approach does not conflict with classical logic or Tarskian semantics\, and aligns with David Wiggins’ ‘Only a and b Principle’\, according to which facts about objects other than a and b are irrelevant to whether a is identical to b.
URL:https://cefises.be/fr/evenement/cefises-seminar-27-feb/
LOCATION:Salle Ladrière\, Place du Cardinal Mercier 14 (bâtiment Socrate\, a.124)\, Louvain-la-Neuve\, 1348\, Belgium
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR