{"id":1726,"date":"2023-10-12T15:09:45","date_gmt":"2023-10-12T13:09:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.uni.lu\/c2dh-en\/?post_type=news&p=1726"},"modified":"2024-03-05T15:33:41","modified_gmt":"2024-03-05T14:33:41","slug":"cfp-exploring-epistemic-virtues-and-vices-data-infrastructures-and-episteme-between-collaboration-and-exploitation","status":"publish","type":"news","link":"https:\/\/www.uni.lu\/c2dh-en\/news\/cfp-exploring-epistemic-virtues-and-vices-data-infrastructures-and-episteme-between-collaboration-and-exploitation\/","title":{"rendered":"CfP – Exploring Epistemic Virtues and Vices: Data, Infrastructures, and Episteme between Collaboration and Exploitation"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

International Conference on Digital Humanities and Digital History to be held on 14-16 March 2024 at the C\u00b2DH.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Luxembourg Centre for Contemporary and Digital History (C\u00b2DH), in collaboration with the German Historical Institute Washington (GHI), the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media (RRCHNM), and the German Institute for Japanese Studies (DIJ) Tokyo, is organising the Sixth Conference on Digital Humanities and Digital History.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The conference, a collaboration between the GHI, C\u00b2DH, RRCHNM, and the DIJ, will revolve around the concept of \u201cepistemic virtues.\u201d Epistemic virtues refer to the skills and attitudes that certain discourse communities consider exemplary, if not obligatory, for the production, transmission, or acquisition of knowledge in a specific field. In the normative tradition of philosophy of science, epistemic values and virtues refer to ideal-typical definitions of what makes \u201cgood science\u201d and how scientific evidence and arguments can be legitimated. Epistemic values such as \u201cobjectivity,\u201d \u201ctruthfulness,\u201d \u201cimpartiality,\u201d \u201creproducibility,\u201d or \u201caccuracy\u201d have been central to the invention of modern science. In addition to this normative tradition, sociologists and
anthropologists of knowledge have emphasized the phenomenological dimension of doing science. To them, epistemic norms or values are internalized by scientists through the learning and perfection of scientific practices. Knowledge production in this sense is always situational, embedded in its own historicity and spatial rootedness. These practices make and define the \u201cscientific self\u201d of different epistemic communities. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Digital knowledge practices in the field of humanities are currently characterized by a hybridity between analog epistemic traditions and new digital \u201cinterferences,\u201d mingling qualitative and quantitative approaches, \u201cclose\u201d and \u201cdistant\u201d reading of sources as data. This type of research is characterized by a workflow that seems more experimental, uncertain, and collaborative than in the past. Where different disciplinary cultures or communities of practice meet, knowledge production is characterized by the crucial role of go-betweens, by partially diverging interests, and often by unchecked power differentials. We hold that it is especially in these situations of creative uncertainty that epistemic virtues can provide orientation. These virtues mold the scientific self and are labeled \u201cepistemic\u201d because of their perceived relevance to the pursuit of hermeneutics, helping to connect past and present knowledge practices. Based on the hypothesis that \u201cthe digital\u201d has produced new epistemic values and virtues to characterize the production, dissemination, and access to knowledge worldwide \u2013 such as \u201csharing,\u201d \u201ccollaboration,\u201d \u201cparticipation,\u201d \u201ctransparency,\u201d \u201copenness,\u201d \u201csustainability,\u201d \u201ctraceability,\u201d or \u201cFAIRness\u201d (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) \u2013 this conference aims at:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. describing and analyzing concrete manifestations of such new values or virtues in digital humanities \/ history research or teaching practices;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. promoting critical reflection on the importance and role of such norms, values, and virtues in our contemporary political economy of digital knowledge production;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. arguing for an ethical consideration of DH infrastructures, tools, data, and publication platforms by exploring the concepts of epistemic inequalities and injustice.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    In the past years, several scholars have criticized the DH community for overdoing the rhetoric of newness and overstating the revolutionary potential of digital technologies for the production, dissemination and appropriation of information or knowledge.  Scholars like Amanda Fricker, Monica Berger, Walter D. Mignolo, Michael Gordin, or Alan Liu have instead highlighted the epistemic inequalities inscribed into large digital knowledge infrastructures, questioned the universalist assumptions underpinning the epistemic spaces of knowledge productions in the Western world. They have criticized the \u201cScientific Babel\u201d of English language dominance and problematized the focus on predatory publishing and the platform capitalism of open access publishing. These critiques underscore the perpetuation of epistemic colonialism through index- and citation-regimes that systematically disfavor the discoverability, visibility, and therefore recognition of scholarship from the Global South.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The conference thus aims at going beyond the philosophical discussion of the hermeneutic dimension of epistemic values and virtues by enlarging the scope to the political and ethical dimensions of knowledge production, dissemination, and critical appropriation in the digital knowledge economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    For the three-day conference, we invite you to submit proposals by 1 December 2023<\/strong>, for<\/p>\n\n\n\n