BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//The Center for Science & Society at Columbia University - ECPv5.6.0//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:The Center for Science & Society at Columbia University
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://blogs.cuit.columbia.edu/scisoc
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for The Center for Science & Society at Columbia University
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Halifax
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0300
TZNAME:ADT
DTSTART:20170312T060000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0300
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:AST
DTSTART:20171105T050000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20170421
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20170423
DTSTAMP:20260604T144840
CREATED:20170110T182045Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170511T143553Z
UID:5226-1492732800-1492905599@blogs.cuit.columbia.edu
SUMMARY:Evidence: An Interdisciplinary Conversation about Knowing and Certainty
DESCRIPTION:Columbia Law School\, Jerome Greene Hall\n435 W 116th Street\, Room 103 \n****Free and open to the public. REGISTRATION REQUIRED – REGISTER HERE.**** \nThis event features a Keynote address from World Poker Champion Annie Duke – The Paradox of Evidence: Lessons from the Poker Table. Separate registration is required for this event. \nThe conference will bring together academic scholars and scientists\, public policy makers\, non-governmental advocates\, and media experts to discuss the state of “evidence” today. Our goal is to examine the use of evidence – from massive data sets to individual case studies – within and across the disciplines. What counts as evidence in different fields? Why do some disciplines have explicit and broadly-shared norms of evidence gathering and use\, while other disciplines are guided by more implicit evidentiary customs? Why do evidentiary norms change over time in a given discipline\, and are these changes better explained by internal\, theoretical developments or external\, social factors? What happens when new theories outpace a discipline’s current evidentiary practices? For instance\, the recognition that many accurate descriptions of the universe are not deterministic but rather probabilistic has altered natural scientists’ basic conception about what counts as evidence – and about the sheer quantity of evidence needed to prove or disprove hypotheses. Yet even the most advanced tools for evidence-gathering (statistical\, computational\, and experimental) have not kept pace with this turn to probabilistic models in the natural sciences. Meanwhile\, scholars in the humanities\, social sciences\, and law are adopting – or transforming – these same tools in an effort to expand the evidence base\, rigor of proof\, and public appeal of their disciplines (e.g.\, “big” history\,  “distant reading\,” digital humanities\, quantitative sociology\, experimental philosophy\, law and cognition). \nOrganized by: Pamela Smith (History\, Columbia)\, Stuart Firestein (Biology\, Columbia)\, Jeremy Kessler (Law\, Columbia). \nThis conference is sponsored by The Center for Science and Society (CSS) and the Institute for Social and Economic Research and Policy (ISERP) at Columbia University. \n\nDownload (PDF\, 538KB)
URL:https://blogs.cuit.columbia.edu/scisoc/cssevent/evidence-interdisciplinary-conversation-knowing-certainty/
LOCATION:Jerome Greene Hall Room #103\, Columbia University\, 435 West 116th Street\, New York\, NY\, 10027\, United States
CATEGORIES:Center for Science and Society Events,Columbia University Events,NYC Metro area events
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR