Hello and welcome to the APA Blog post of the SCI PHI Podcast! From Bloomington, Indiana, I’m Nick Zautra.
What is the SCI PHI Podcast?
SCI PHI is a weekly podcast featuring interviews with prominent and up-and-coming philosophers of science who engage with scientists in interesting ways.
SCI PHI interviews focus on the origin stories of how people found their way into philosophy of science, how they became successful, what current projects they are excited about, and anything else they would like to discuss; for example, the state of the field, major problems in the sciences and in philosophy, and the future of philosophy of science.
Unlike other excellent philosophy podcasts such as New Books in Philosophy, Philosophy Bites, or The Pansycast, which tend to focus on a philosopher’s new book, article, or arguments, a major focus of SCI PHI is really on philosophers of science as people. A philosopher’s CV is public knowledge; but what of their life CV? What was it like for Bas Van Fraassen growing up in a small town in the Netherlands? What did Elisabeth Lloyd’s parents do? How did Colin Allen’s playing the role of Bassanio in The Merchant of Venice influence his future in philosophy? Why did Elliot Sober do his PhD backwards? How did Carol Cleland cope with her numerous struggles as a woman in the male-dominated areas of physics, computer science, and philosophy? What was it like for Massimo Pigliucci to experience a mid-life crisis? Why did Rick Grush nearly resign from academia all together? In this regard, SCI PHI isn’t a podcast about philosophy of science, but of the people who do philosophy of science.
Why was the SCI PHI Podcast originally created?
As a third-year doctoral student in a History and Philosophy of Science program at Indiana University, I was eager to develop my own voice as a researcher. But to do so, I needed to explore and better understand philosophy of science from a variety of perspectives. I found that Indiana had particular orientations toward integrated and “in-practice” approaches, whereas philosophers of science I read in other departments did things a bit differently. I wondered: what do other folks out there do? What are they like, as people and as researchers? How were they trained? How do they think? SCI PHI originated out of my own general interest in wanting to know more about philosophy of science, and how to do it well.
An additional motivation came from repeated failed attempts to explain to family, friends, and other academic colleagues just what it is philosophers of science actually do. I recognized that philosophy of science as a whole lacked a social engagement project that sought to promote public understanding of the discipline. I thought SCI PHI could be a great way for folks who weren’t in philosophy of science; e.g., other philosophers, scientists, and general educated listeners to learn more about this thing that is philosophy of science and its connection with the science.
Why this particular podcast format?
I really enjoy the mid-long podcast format utilized by Marc Maron’s WTF, as well as that of The Thinking Poker Podcast (hosted by a former University of Chicago philosophy grad Andrew Brokos and Cornell philosophy PhD grad, Nate Meyvis). Those are excellent examples of podcasts where you, the listener, show up for an interesting guest who might be known for this or that, but you stay to hear the dynamic that unfolds between the guest and the host, and the intimate details they might reveal about their profession and themselves. The mid-long format does involve a bit more commitment on the part of the listener. But to get the real story of what philosophy of science, and really, what philosophy is all about, I think this format works really well.
What are the general aims and goals of the podcast?
The general aims and goals of the podcast are to serve as an outreach platform that connects philosophers of science with other areas of academia, and to the public; to learn of the origin stories and diverse backgrounds of philosophers of science; and to gain a better understanding of the spectrum of philosophy of science methods.
After two years and fifty interviews, the project continues to reach its initial goals, while evolving into a forum for working philosophers of science to freely share their meta-philosophic views on the conceptual, epistemic, and structural problems facing their discipline. In particular, I have made it a point to discuss in detail with each guest, “What is the greatest challenge facing philosophy of science today?”
The responses from podcast guests have been so telling, that I decided to do my own qualitative research on the interviews themselves, and to present my findings in a poster at PSA 2018: The 26th Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association on November 3rd. Initial qualitative analysis suggests four perceived general challenges facing philosophers of science:
- staying relevant to mainstream philosophy, and to mainstream science;
- drawing too much or too little on philosophic methods and/or empirical work;
- over-reliance on case studies as a preferred methodology; and
- how to contribute to the public understanding of science as a philosopher of science.
Developing a general understanding of the challenge areas in philosophy of science as perceived by those in the field may prove useful in helping to direct current and future philosophy of science work, and to strengthen connections with science, philosophy, and the public. Thus, a future goal of the podcast, one that I’ve only recently begun to consider, will be to develop the transcribed interviews into a book, The Greatest Challenge Facing Philosophy of Science Today (according to philosophers of science), with a similar structure to Werner Callebut’s Taking the Naturalistic Turn, Or How Real Philosophy of Science is Done published in 1993.
What are some notable highlights from previous episodes?
Episode 3: David Danks, Professor of Philosophy at Carnegie Mellon shares in detail his unique approach to interdisciplinary puzzle solving, and in doing so, provides a blueprint for philosophy of science worth doing.
Episode 9: Jane Maienschein, American Professor and Director for the Center for Biology and Society at Arizona State University, describes her wandering (and wondering) road beginning in astrophysics at MIT to studying history and philosophy of science at Indiana.
Episode 15: Anya Plutynski, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Washington University in St. Louis, shares how her personal experience with cancer led to scientifically-engaged philosophical work on causation and explanation in cancer research.
Episode 22: Colin Klein, Australian Research Council Future Fellow and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Philosophy at Macquarie University in Sydney, discusses his humbling experience going from a small liberal arts college to ego-deflating graduate study at Princeton.
Episode 30: Elisabeth Lloyd, the Arnold and Maxine Tanis Chair of History and Philosophy of Science at Indiana University, details getting through a difficult and discouraging environment as a female graduate student who experienced recurring sexual harassment. This episode was later picked by Daily Nous and The Chronicle of Higher Education as part of the #MeToo movement.
Episode 34: Jackie Sullivan, Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy at Western Ontario, shares how a challenging early home life pushed her to study existentialism and philosophy.
Episode 40: Michael Weisberg, Professor and Chair of Philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania, describes how a Creationism incident in his own backyard led to the development of the Laboratory for Understanding Science.
Episode 43: Janet Stemwedel, Professor and Chair in Philosophy at San Jose State University, speaks about how engaging in several online academic communities through blog writing and Twitter has helped her philosophical work.
Episode 48: Ann-Sophie Barwich, Visiting Professor in the Cognitive Science Program at Indiana University Bloomington, explains the importance of thinking about the sense of smell as a model for neuroscience and the sense, and in doing so demonstrates the in-practice approach to philosophy of science.
Do you have any suggestions for philosophers that wish to engage in public philosophy or start their own podcasts?
The podcast literally started after a fellow graduate student, Ali Mirza, and I would text back and forth having “wouldn’t it be cool if…” discussions on fun projects we might do with philosophy of science. If you have an idea, talk about it with some supportive folks, and then go for it. Don’t wait–you can learn along the way. Get started on it yesterday.
Once you get started, you will learn what works and what doesn’t. You will make mistakes. That’s okay. There is a wealth of resources online all about how to successfully run and improve your podcast. Learning from others is quite helpful.
If you decide to engage in public philosophy in some form, make sure it’s worth it for you. I continually have folks say to me, “I sincerely appreciate your service – all the work you are putting in. How do you do it?” And to me, this is something I actually enjoy doing, so it doesn’t feel like work. Getting to chat with brilliant individuals on a one-to-one basis is a blast. The main reason I’m doing this is not because it’s good for the profession, or that will look good on a CV (in fact I’ve been told it could have the opposite effect), but because I genuinely enjoy learning about philosophy of science, and helping others to learn more about it, too.
What is it that you like to do? What is it you would like to learn? To communicate? Once you figure it out, send me a link to your project (nzautra@indiana.edu) and I’ll be excited to listen.
You can see the Patreon page for the SCI PHI podcast here.
Nick Zautra
Nick Zautra (@NickZautra) is a Ph.D. candidate in History and Philosophy of Science and Cognitive Science at Indiana University Bloomington. Nick is the host and producer of the SCI PHI Podcast. He lives in Bloomington with his wife and two wonderful corgis Moose and Minnie, who can frequently be heard on the podcast.
