Switch on EDIT for your profile
Frank Zenker,
Assistant Professor
Department of Philosophy and Ethics in Administration
Faculty of Administration and Social Science
Email:
Room no: 228 GG
Communication languages: German, English





 

Work address

Warsaw University of Technology, Pl. Politechniki 1,

00-661 Warsaw, Poland, frank.zenker@pw.edu.pl

 

Researcher unique identifier: ORCID 0000-0001-7173-7964

Research Areas: Philosophy of Science and Epistemology, Logic and Philosophy of Language, Cognitive Science

Languages: German (native); English (near-native); Dutch, French, Italian, Swedish (basic), Chinese (rudimentary)

 

Education

1994-1998 University of Hamburg, Germany; B.A. studies in Philosophy, Linguistics of English, Cognitive Science, and Political Science

1998-1999 Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, U.S.A; Graduate studies in Philosophy and Anthropology

1999-2001 University of Hamburg, Germany; M.A. studies in Philosophy

2001-2002 International School for Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; M.A. in Discourse & Argumentation Studies

2002-2005 University of Hamburg, Germany; Ph.D. studies in Philosophy of Science      

2005-2006 Lund University, Sweden; Visiting Fellow, Department of Philosophy

2006-2007 University of Calgary, AB, Canada; Visiting Fellow in the History and Philosophy of Science Research Group

2007           Hamburg University, Germany; Ph.D. Philosophy (defended 27 Sept 2007)

 

Academic Merits

Docentur (equivalent to associate professor/cumulative habilitation), Reviewer: Gerhard Schurz, University of Düsseldorf, Germany, 22 Jan 2014.

Dr. phil., magna cum laude, Philosophy of Science, Department of Philosophy, Hamburg University, Germany; Thesis: Ceteris Paribus in Conservative Belief Revision (1st reader: Ulrich Gähde, 2nd reader: Erik J. Olsson); defense: 27 Sept 2007, diploma: 5 May 2009.

M.A., with honors, Discourse & Argumentation Studies. Dpt. for Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory & Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands; Thesis: The Etymological Argument: Fallacy or Sound Move? (1st reader: Bart Garssen, 2nd reader: Frans H. van Eemeren), 31 Aug 2002.

B.A., “Zwischenprüfung” (equivalent to B.A. exam), University of Hamburg, Germany, Philosophy, thesis on epiphenomenal qualia, 17 Mar 1997.

 

Current Position

2019   Assistant Professor, Bogacizi University, Dpt. of Philosophy, Istanbul, Turkey.

2019   Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy and Ethics in Administration,       International Center for Formal Ontology, Warsaw University of Technology,           Warsaw, Poland.

 

Previous Positions

2014-19         Associate Professor (docent), Lund University (LU), Sweden, Department of         Philosophy & Cognitive Science

2016-17 Researcher, Slovak Academy of Sciences (SAS), Bratislava, Slovakia,

Institute of Philosophy

2015-17 Researcher, University of Konstanz, Germany, Department of Philosophy

2011-16 Researcher, Lund University, Department of Philosophy and Cognitive Science

2008-10 PostDoc, Lund University, Department of Philosophy and Cognitive Science

2008     Project Assistant, E-Learning: Elementary Symbolic Logic (with Albert Neven), Department of Philosophy, University of Bochum, Germany

2004-06 Project Assistant, E-Learning: Elementary Symbolic Logic; Introduction to Epistemology (with Ulrich Gähde), Hamburg University, Germany

Fellowships

2019     Guest Lecturer, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, P.R. China (April)

2019     Visiting Researcher, ArgLab, Nova University, Lisbon, Portugal (March)

2017     Visiting Professor, Institute of Logic and Cognition, Sun Yat-sen University (SYSU), Guangzhou, P.R. China (Feb-May)

2017     Short-term lecturer, Department of Psychology, Diego Portales University, Santiago, Chile (October-November).

2011    Erik Allard Fellowship, Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies (Jan-Jun)

 

Publications[1]

Authored Books

  1. Zenker, F. (2009). Ceteris Paribus in Conservative Belief Revision. On the Role of Minimal Change in Rational Theory Development (Ph.D. Thesis, University of Hamburg). Berlin: Peter Lang (ISBN 978-3-631-57283-2).
  2. Zenker, F. (2002). The Etymological Argument: Fallacy or Sound Move? (MA Thesis, University of Amsterdam). Munich: GRIN Publishing GmbH (ISBN 978-3-638-14401-8).

 

Edited Books

  1. Kaipainen, M., Hautamäki, A., Gärdenfors, P., and Zenker, F. (eds.) (2018). Title pending (Working Title: Conceptual Spaces at Work; Synthese Library, Vol. pending). Dordrecht: Springer (in print, ISBN pending).
  2. Zenker, F., and Gärdenfors, P. (eds.) (2015). Applications of Conceptual Spaces: The Case for Geometric Knowledge Representation (Synthese Library, Vol. 359). Dordrecht: Springer (ISBN 978-3-319-15020-8).
  3. Zenker, F. (ed.) (2013). Bayesian Argumentation: The Practical Side of Probability (Synthese Library, Vol. 362). Dordrecht: Springer (ISBN 978-94-007-5356-3).

 

Edited Proceedings

  1. Zenker, F. (ed.) (2012). Argumentation: Cognition and Community (Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, May 2011). University of Windsor, ON, Canada (ISBN 978-0-920233-66-5).     http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/.

 

Edited Journal Issues

  1. Zenker, F. (2018). Reasoning, Argumentation, and Critical Thinking Instruction. Special Issue of Topoi, 37 (1) (ISSN 0167-7411).
  2. Zenker, F., and Proietti, C. (2014). Social Dynamics and Collective Rationality. Special Issue of Synthese, 191 (ISSN 0039-7857).
  3. Andreas, H., and Zenker, F. (2014). Perspectives on Structuralism. Special Issue of Erkenntnis, 79 (8) (ISSN 0156-0106).
  4. Zenker, F. (2011). Selected Papers: 13th Biannual Argumentation Conference, March 2010, Wake Forest University, N.C., USA. Cogency 3(1) (ISSN 0718-8285).

 

Journal Articles (* indicates peer review)

  1. Zenker, F.; Dahlman, C.; Sikström, S.; Wahlberg, L.; and Sarwar, F. (2019). Generalization in Legal Argumentation. Journal of Forensic Psychology: Research and Practic (forthcoming) (ISSN: 2473-2850).
  2. Zenker, F. (2019). From stories—via arguments, scenarios, and cases—to probabilities (Commentary). Topics in Cognitive Science (forthcoming) (ISSN:1756-8765).
  3. Yu, S., and Zenker, F. (2019). A dialectical view on conduction: Reasons, warrants, and normal suasory inclinations. Informal Logic, 39(1), 32-69 (ISSN 0824-2577).*
  4. Witte, E.H., and Zenker, F. (2018). Data replication matters, replicated hypothesis-corroboration counts. (Commentary on “Making Replication Mainstream” by Rolf A. Zwaan, Alexander Etz, Richard E., Lucas, and M. Brent Donnellan). Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 41, e120 (ISSN: 0140-525X).*
  5. Krefeld-Schwalb, A; Witte, E.H., and Zenker, F. (2018). Hypothesis-testing demands trustworthy data—a simulation approach to statistical inference advocating the research program strategy. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 460 (ISSN 1664-1078).*
  6. Zenker, F. (2018). Reasoning, argumentation, and critical thinking instruction (Editor’s introduction). Topoi, 37(1), 91–92 (ISSN 0167-7411).
  7. Zenker, F.; Dahlman, C.; Bååth, R., and Sarwar, F. (2018). Reasons pro et contra as a debiasing technique in legal contexts. Psychological Reports, 121(3), 511–526 (ISSN 0033-2941).*
  8. Godden, D., and Zenker, F. (2018). A probabilistic analysis of argument cogency. Synthese, 195(4), 1715–1740 (ISSN 0039-7857).*
  9. Zenker, F. (2018). Logic, Reasoning, Argumentation: Insights from the Wild. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 27, 421–451 (ISBN 1425-3305).*
  10. Yu, S., and Zenker, F. (2017). Peirce knew why abduction isn’t IBE—A scheme and critical questions for abductive argument. Argumentation (ISSN 0920-427X, online first).*
  11. Xiong, M., and Zenker, F. (2017). Legal facts in argumentation-based litigation games. Argumentation (ISSN 0920-427X, online first).*
  12. Masterton, G., Zenker, F., and Gärdenfors, P. (2017). Using conceptual spaces to exhibit continuity through scientific theory change. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 7(1), 127–150 (ISSN 1879-4912).*
  13. Witte, E.H., and Zenker, F. (2017b). From discovery to justification. Outline of an ideal research program in empirical psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1847 (ISSN 1664-1078).*
  14. Witte, E.H., and Zenker, F. (2017a). Extending a multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect to a research program. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 39(1), 74–80 (ISSN 0197-3533).*
  15. Zenker, F., and Gärdenfors, P. (2016). Continuity of theory structure: a conceptual spaces approach. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 30(4), 343–360 (ISSN 0269-8595).*
  16. Dahlman, C., Zenker, F., and Sarvar, F. (2016). Miss rate neglect in legal evidence. Law, Probability & Risk, 15(4), 239–250 (ISSN 1470-8396).*
  17. Witte, E.H., and Zenker, F. (2016b). Beyond schools—reply to Marsman, Ly & Wagenmakers. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 38(6), 313–317 (ISSN 0197-3533).*
  18. Witte, E.H., and Zenker, F. (2016a). Reconstructing recent work on macro-social stress as a research program. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 38(6), 301–307 (ISSN 0197-3533).*
  19. Jacot, J., Genot, E., and Zenker, F. (2016). From reasonable preferences, via argumentation, to logic. Journal of Applied Logic, 18, 105–128 (ISSN 1570-8683).*
  20. Zenker, F. (2016). Having knowledge from multiple testimonies: Reply to Aviezer Tucker’s “The generation of knowledge from multiple testimonies.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 5 (1), 52–55 (open access, http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-2zD).
  21. Smid, G., and Zenker, F. (2015). Three logicians walk into a bar. The Reasoner, 9(3), 21-22 (ISSN 1757-0522).*
  22. Godden, D., and Zenker, F. (2015). Denying antecedents and affirming consequents: The state of the art. Informal Logic, 35 (1), 88–134 (ISSN 0824-2577).*
  23. Petersen, G., and Zenker, F. (2014). From Euler to Navier-Stokes: A spatial analysis of conceptual changes in 19th-century fluid dynamics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 28(3), 235–253 (ISSN 0269-8595).*
  24. Zenker, F., and Proietti, C. (2014). Social dynamics and collective rationality (Editors’ introduction). Synthese, 191, 2353–2358 (ISSN 0039-7857).
  25. Andreas H., and Zenker, F. (2014). Basic concepts of structuralism. Erkenntnis, 79(8), 1367–1372 (ISSN 0165-0106).
  26. Zenker, F., and Gärdenfors, P. (2014). Modeling diachronic changes in structuralism and in conceptual spaces. Erkenntnis, 79(8), 1547–1561 (ISSN 0165-0106).*
  27. Zenker, F. (2014). Pro-et-contra Argumentation—Gründe, Werte, Kompromisse (Reasons, Values, Compromises). Wissenswert, 03/2013, 20–29. http://www.uni-hamburg.de/fachbereiche-einrichtungen/fb16/wissenswert.html *
  28. Zenker, F. (2013). What do normative approaches to argumentation stand to gain from rhetorical insights? Philosophy & Rhetoric, 46(4), 415–436 (ISSN 0031-8213).*
  29. Gärdenfors, P. and Zenker, F. (2013). Theory change as dimensional change: conceptual spaces applied to the dynamics of empirical theories. Synthese 190(6), 1039–1058 (ISSN 0039-7857).*
  30. Zenker, F. (2011b). Editor’s introduction. Cogency 3(1), 7–12 (ISSN 0718-8285).
  31. Zenker, F. (2011a). Experts and Bias: When is the interest-based objection to an authority argument sound? Argumentation, 25, 355–370 (ISSN 0920-427X).*
  32. Zenker, F. (2010). Analyzing social policy argumentation: a case study of the 2007 majority opinion of the German National Ethics Council regarding an amendment of the Stem Cell Law. Informal Logic, 30, 62–91 (ISSN 0824-2577).*
  33. Zenker, F. (2006b). Lakatos’ challenge? Auxiliary hypotheses and non-monotonous inference. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 37, 405–415 (ISSN 0925-4560).*
  34. Zenker, F. (2006a). Monotonicity and reasoning with exceptions. Argumentation, 20, 227–236 (ISSN 0920-427X).*

 

Book Chapters (* indicates peer review)

  1. Hahn, U., Bluhm, R., and Zenker, F. (2017). Causal Argument. In: Waldmann, M. (ed.). Oxford Handbook of Causal Reasoning (chapter 25). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press (DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199399550.013.26; ISBN: 9780199399550).*
  2. Zenker, F., and Dahlman, C. (2016). Debiasing and Rule of Law. In: Feteris, E., Kloosterhuis, H., Plug, J., and Smith, C. (eds.). Legal Argumentation and the Rule of Law (pp. 217–229). The Hague: Eleven Int. (ISBN 978-94-6236-702-9).*
  3. Zenker, F. (2016). Similarity as distance: Three models for scientific conceptual knowledge. In: Lukowski, P., Gemel, A., and Zukowski, B. (eds.). Cognition, Meaning and Action (Lodz-Lund Studies in Cognitive Science, Vol. X) (pp. 63-86). Lodz: Lodz University Press (ISBN 978-83-7969-759-5).
  4. Zenker, F., and Dahlman, C. (2016). Reliable Debiasing Techniques in Legal Contexts? Weak Signals from a darker Corner of the Social Science Universe. In: Paglieri, F., Bonelli, L., & Felletti, S. (Eds.). The psychology of argument: Cognitive approaches to argumentation and persuasion (pp. 173-196). London: College Publications (ISBN 978-1-84890-195-7).*
  5. Zenker, F., and Gärdenfors, P. (2015). Communication, Rationality, and Conceptual Changes in Scientific Theories. In: Zenker, F. & Gärdenfors, P. (eds.). Applications of Conceptual Spaces: The Case for Geometric Knowledge Representation (pp. 259–277). Dordrecht: Springer (978-3-319-15020-8).*
  6. Gärdenfors, P., and Zenker, F. (2015). Conceptual spaces at work (Editors’ introduction). In: Zenker, F., and Gärdenfors, P. (eds.). Applications of Conceptual Spaces: The Case for Geometric Knowledge Representation (pp. 3–13). Dordrecht: Springer (ISBN 978-3-319-15020-8).*
  7. Zenker, F. (2014). From Features via Frames to Spaces. Modeling Scientific Conceptual Change without Incommensurability or Aprioricity. In: Gamerschlag, T., D. Gerland, R. Osswald, and W. Petersen (eds.). Concept Types and Frames. Applications in Language and Philosophy (Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy Series, Vol. 94) (pp. 69–89). Dordrecht: Springer (ISBN 978-3-319-01540-8).*
  8. Zenker, F. (2013b). In Support of the Weak Rhetoric as Epistemic Thesis. On the Generality and Reliability of Persuasion Knowledge. In: Belle, H., van, Gillaerts, P., Gorp, B. van, Mieroop, D. van de, and Rutten, K. (eds.). Verbal and Visual Rhetoric in a Media World (Proceedings of Rhetoric in Society III, January 2011, Antwerp, Belgium) (pp. 61–75). Amsterdam: Leiden University Press (ISBN 978-90-8728-190-8).*
  9. Zenker, F. (2013a). Bayesian Argumentation. The Practical Side of Probability (Editor’s introduction). In: Zenker, F. (ed.). Bayesian Argumentation (Synthese Library Vol. 362). Dordrecht: Springer, 1–11 (ISBN 978-94-007-5356-3).
  10. Gärdenfors, P. & Zenker, F. (2012). Theory Change and Dimensional Change. In: Churnside, R. (ed.). Emerging Colors in Science—Transdisciplinary Essays (pp. 147–175). San José: University of Costa Rica Press (ISBN 978-9968-46-330-0).
  11. Zenker, F., Gottschall, C., Newen, A, Riel, R. van, & Vosgerau, G. (2011c). Designing an Introductory Course in Elementary Symbolic Logic within the Blackboard e-Learning Environment. In: Blackburn, P., Dithmarsch, H. van, Manzano, M., and Soler, F. (eds.). Tools for Teaching Logic (Proceedings of the Third International Congress Salamanca, Spain, June 2011, TICTTL) (pp. 249–255). (Springer Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 6680). Heidelberg: Springer (ISBN 978-3-642-21349-6).*
  12. Zenker, F. (2011b). Deduction, Induction, Conduction. An Attempt at Unifying Natural Language Argument Structures. In: Blair, J.A., and Johnson, R.H. (eds.). Conductive Argument: An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning (pp. 74–85). London: College Publications (ISBN 978-1-84890-005-9).*
  13. Gärdenfors, P., and Zenker, F. (2011a). Using Conceptual Spaces to Model the Dynamics of Empirical Theories. In: Olsson, E.J., and Enqvist, S. (eds.). Philosophy of Science Meets Belief Revision Theory (Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science Vol. 21) (pp. 137–153). Berlin: Springer (ISBN 978-90-481-9608-1).

 

Book Reviews

  1. Zenker, F. (2014). Review of Spohn, W. The Laws of Belief (2012). Oxford: OUP. Philosophical Quaterly 65(259), 310–313 (ISSN 0031-8094).
  2. Zenker, F. (2012). Amos and I. Review of Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux. Inquiry 27 (2), 54–57 (ISSN 1093-1082).
  3. Zenker, F. (2011). Parmenides as Secret Hero. Review of Betz, G. (2010). Theorie dialektischer Strukturen (Theory of Dialectical Structures). Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann. Argumentation 25(4), 513–525 (ISSN 0920-427X).
  4. Zenker, F. (2010). Review of Eemeren, F.H. van, Garssen, B, and Meuffels, B. (2009). Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness. Amsterdam: Springer. Cogency 2 (1), 149–165 (ISSN 0718-8285).
  5. Zenker, F. (2009b). Review of Eemeren, F.H. van, and Garssen, B. (eds.) (2008). Controversy and Confrontation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Informal Logic 29, 447–475 (ISSN 0824-2577).
  6. Zenker, F. (2009a). Treating Kuhn’s Gap with Critical Contextualism. Review of William Rehg (2009). Cogent Science in Context. The Science Wars, Argumentation Theory and Habermas. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Cogency 1 (1), 149–182 (ISSN 0718-8285).

 

Lexicon Entries

  1. Zenker, F. (2017). Falsification. In: Turner, B. (ed.). The Wiley Encyclopedia of Social Theory (pp. 1–3). Chichester: Wiley Blackwell (ISBN: 978-1-118-43086-6).
  2. Zenker, F. (2010). Entries: AGM; Deduction; Dilemma. In: Russo, F., and Williamson, J. (eds.). Key Terms in Logic. London: Continuum Books (ISBN 978-18-4706-114-0). Deduction preprinted in: The Reasoner 4 (2010), 64–65 (ISSN 1757-0522).

 

Conference Proceedings (* indicates peer review; + indicates peer commentary)

  1. Zenker, F., Debowska-Koslowska, K., Godden, D., Seliger, M., and Wells, S. (2019). Five approaches to argument strength: probabilistic, dialectical, structural, empirical, and computational. In: Laar, J.A. van, and Duthil-Novaes, C. (eds.), Reason to Dissent (Proceedings of ECA 2019, 24-27 June, Groningen, The Netherlands) (pp.xx-yy). London: College Publications (forthcoming).
  2. Yu, S., and Zenker, F. (2018). Towards complete argument evaluation: A Logico-pragmatic account of argument schemes. In Garssen, B., Godden, D., Mitchell, G., and Wagemans, J.H.M. (eds). Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA 2018) (pp. 1198-1205). Amsterdam: Rozenberg. http://cf.hum.uva.nl/issa/
  3. Zenker, F. (2018). Can Bayesian models have “normative pull” on human reasoners? In: Oswald, S., and Maillat, D. (eds.). Argumentation and Inference, Vol. I: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg 2017 (pp. 496-478). London: College Publications (ISNB 978-3-84890-283-1).*+
  4. Kido, H., and Zenker, F. (2017). Argument-Based Bayesian Estimation of Attack Graphs: A Preliminary Empirical Analysis. In: B. An, A.L.C. Bazzan, J. Leite, S. Villata, and L. van der Torre (eds.). 20th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems (PRIMA 2017), Nice, France, 30 Oct-3 Nov, 2017 (pp. 523-532). Dordrecht: Springer.*
  5. Zenker, F. (2016b). The polysemy of ‘fallacy’—or ‘bias’, for that matter. In Bondy, P., and Benaquista, L. (eds). Argumentation, Objectivity and Bias (Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, 18-21 May, 2016) (pp. 1–14). Windsor, ON: OSSA. http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/ +
  6. Zenker, F. (2016a). John R. Welch’s “Conclusions as hedged hypotheses.” In Bondy, P., and Benaquista, L. (eds). Argumentation, Objectivity and Bias (Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, 18-21 May, 2016) (pp. 1–2). Windsor, ON: OSSA. http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/
  7. Zenker, F., Dahlman, C., Bååth, R., and Sarvar, F. (2016). Giving Reasons Pro et Contra as a Debiasing Technique in Legal Decision Making. In Mohammed, D., and Lewinksi, M. (eds.). Argumentation and Reasoned Action (Proceedings of the First European Conference on Argumentation, Lisbon, June 2015), Vol. 1 (pp. 809–823). London: College Publications (ISBN 978-1-84890-211-4). +
  8. Jacot, J., Genot, E., and Zenker, F. (2015). Logical Validity, Bounded Rationality, and Pragma-Dialectics: Outline of a Game-Theoretic Naturalization of Classically-Valid Argumentation. In: Eemeren, F.H. van, Garssen, B., Godden, D, and Mitchell, G. (eds). Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), July 2014 (pp. 1–12). Amsterdam: SicSat http://rozenbergquarterly.com/issa-proceedings-2014-table-of-contents/.
  9. Zenker, F. (2015). Denying the Antecedent Probabilized: a Dialectical View. In: Eemeren, F.H. van, Garssen, B., Godden, D, and Mitchell, G. (eds). Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), July 2014 (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam: Rozenberg. http://rozenbergquarterly.com/issa-proceedings-2014-table-of-contents/
  10. Zenker, F. (2014b). Commentary on Mark Battersby and Sharon Bailin’s “Critical Thinking and Cognitive Biases.” In: Mohammed, D., and Lewiński, M. (eds.). Virtues of Argumentation (Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22-26 May 2013) (pp. 1–7). Windsor, ON: OSSA (ISSN 2371-8323), http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/
  11. Zenker, F. (2014a). Know Thy Biases. In: Mohammed, D., and Lewiński, M. (eds.). Virtues of Argumentation (Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22-26 May 2013) (pp. 1–11). Windsor, ON: OSSA (ISSN 2371-8323), http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/+
  12. Zenker, F. (2012c). The Explanatory Value of Cognitive Asymmetries in Policy Controversies. In: Goodwin, J., and Delaplante, R. (eds.). Between Scientists and Citizens (Proceedings of the First Int. Conference of the Great Plains Society for the Study of Argumentation, GPSSA, Ames, Iowa, USA, June 1-2, 2012) (pp. 441–452). Ames, IO: GPSSA (ISBN 978-1478152347).*
  13. Zenker, F. (2012b). Foundations for Nothing and Facts for Free. In: Zenker, F. (ed.). Argumentation: Cognition and Community (Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, OSSA, CD-ROM) (pp. 1–7). Windsor, ON: OSSA (ISBN 978-0-920233-66-5).
  14. Zenker, F. (2012a). Commentary on F. Macagno’s ‘Implicatures and Hierarchies of Presumptions’. In: Zenker, F. (ed.). Argumentation: Cognition and Community (Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, OSSA, CD-ROM) (pp. 1–4). Windsor, ON: OSSA (ISBN 978-0-920233-66-5).
  15. Zenker, F. (2011b). Why Study the Overlap Between Ought and Is Anyways? On Empirically Investigating the Conventional Validity of the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules. In: Eemeren, F.H. van, Garssen, B., Godden, D, and Mitchell, G. (eds.). Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), June 2010 (pp. 2083‑2091). Amsterdam: SicSat (ISBN 978-90-3610-243-8).*
  16. Zenker, F. (2009c). Commentary on J. Plug’s ‘Telling Examples. Strategic Maneuvering in Plenary Debates in the European Parliament’. In: Ritola, J. (ed.). Proceedings of the 8th Int. Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), Windsor, ON, June 2009, CD ROM, (pp. 1–4). Windsor, ON: OSSA (ISBN 978-0-920233-51-1).
  17. Zenker, F. (2009b). Reconstructive Charity, Soundness and the RSA-Criteria of Good Argumentation. In: Ritola, J. (ed.). Proceedings of the 8th Int. Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), Windsor, ON, June 2009, CD ROM, (pp. 1–15). Windsor, ON: OSSA (ISBN 978-0-920233-51-1).
  18. Zenker, F. (2009a). Complexity without Insight. Ceteris Paribus Clauses in Conductive Argumentation. In: Jacobs, S. (ed.). Concerning Argument (Proceedings of the 2007 NCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation, Alta, Utah) (pp. 810–818). Washington: National Communication Association (ISBN 978-0-944811-79-5).
  19. Zenker, F. (2007b). Pragma-Dialectic’s Necessary Conditions for a Critical Discussion. In: Hansen, H. et al. (eds.). Proceedings of the 7th Int. Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), Windsor, ON, June 2007, CD ROM (pp. 1–15). Windsor, ON: OSSA (ISBN 978-0-9683461-5-0), http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/.
  20. Zenker, F. (2007a). Changes in Conduct-Rules and Ten Commandments: Pragma-Dialectics 1984 vs. 2004. In: Eemeren, F.H. van, et al. (eds.). Proceedings of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), Amsterdam, June 2006 (pp. 1581–1589). Amsterdam: SicSat, (ISBN 978-90-5170-916-2).

 

Translations

  1. Zenker, F. (2009). Translation [ENGL > GER] of: Tindale, C. (2008). Fallacy Studies in the North-American Tradition (unpublished manuscript).
  2. Zenker, F. (2008). Translation [GER > ENG] of: Wohlrapp, H. (2008, chapter 5). The Pro- and Contra-Discussion. A Critique of Trudy Govier’s ‘Conductive Argument.’ Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann (unpublished manuscript).

 

Script

  1. (2008). Argumentationstheorie. Lecture Scripts, Ruhr University Bochum.

 

Popular/Reports

  1. Zenker, F. (2016). Workshop Report. Aspects of Defeasible Reasoning. The Reasoner, 10(7), 57-58 (ISSN 1757-0522).
  2. Zenker, F. (2015b). Conference Report. Reasoning, Argumentation, and Critical Thinking Instruction. The Reasoner, 9(4), 31-33 (ISSN 1757-0522).
  3. Zenker, F. & Andreas, H. (2013). With Holger Andreas. Workshop Report. Perspectives on Structuralism. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 44(1), 227–234 (ISSN 0925-4560).
  4. Zenker, F. (2012c). Money, Money, Money. Practical Advice on Writing Funding Proposals. luPOD—Lund University Postdoc Forum (www.lupod.se)
  5. Zenker, F. & Andreas, H. (2012b). With Holger Andreas. Workshop Report. Perspectives on Structuralism. The Reasoner 6 (4), 62–64 (ISSN 1757‑0522).
  6. Zenker, F. (2012a). Workshop Report. Copenhagen Lund Workshops in Social Epistemology (December 2011). The Reasoner 6 (1), 10–11 (ISSN 1757-0522).
  7. Zenker, F. (2011d). Workshop Report. Copenhagen Lund Workshops in Social Epistemology (February and September 2011). The Reasoner 5 (11), 191–192 (ISSN 1757-0522).
  8. Zenker, F. (2011b). with Paula Quinon. Thank Goodness–Parking Tickets aren’t Tax Deductible: Practical advice on filing for tax returns. luPOD–Lund University Postdoc Forum (www.lupod.se).
  9. Zenker, F. (2011a). Conference Report. European Network Meeting, Lund, March 2011. The Reasoner 5 (4), 60 (ISSN 1757-0522).
  10. Zenker, F. (2010). Workshop Report. Bayesian Argumentation. The Reasoner 4 (11), 166–67 (ISSN 1757-0522).
  11. Zenker, F. (2009). The Importance of Being Eurotrash. Practical Advice on EU Frontier Worker Regulations and Benefits. luPOD—Lund University Postdoc Forum (www.lupod.se).
  12. Zenker, F. (2006). Instead of a Career Story. Amsterdam Argumentation Chronicle 1 (2), 5.

 

Teaching

Higher education teacher training courses

  1. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, an Introduction, Centre for Educational Development, Lund University, September to December 2011 (certified).
  2. Teaching and Learning through English, Centre for Educational Development, Lund University, September to December 2009 (certified).     
  3. Tutoring Workshop, Interdisciplinary Center for Didactics in Higher Education, Hamburg, Germany, 1997 (non-certified).

 

I command solid teaching experience from leading semester-long (13-15 weeks) tutorials for groups from five to twenty-five students at BA and MA/PhD level on both academic and technical topics. This includes a weekly two hour plenum session (which on some occasions I led with up to 120 students), and a weekly two hour tutorial with typically fifteen students (that I always led). I acquired most of this experience as a teaching assistant and an academic tutor for the Philosophy and the Linguistics departments at Hamburg University, Germany, where I served in these roles for five years.

           I have since taught courses at the Universities of Greifswald, Hamburg, and Konstanz, Germany, at the Free University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Lund University, Sweden, as well as Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou (SYSU), Southwestern University of Finance & Economics (SWUFE), Chengdu, Beijing Normal University (BNU), Beijing Language and Culture University (BLCU), and Xi’an Jiaotong University (XTTU), P.R. China. I have moreover given guest lectures at the University of Tongren, the University Xiamen, and at Huaqiao University, PRC, at Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey, at Diego Portales University, Santiago, and the University of Concepcion, Chile, as well as at the Universities of Copenhagen, Denmark, Helsinki, Finland, Poznan, Poland, Trnava, Slovakia, Zagreb, Croatia, Budapest, Hungary, at RIT-Rochester, NY, USA, and at the University of Windsor, ON, Canada.

           Since 2013, I teach an annual week-long course module in the Cognitive Science program at AMU Poznan, Poland, on philosophical aspects of studying human reasoning with empirical methods, including probabilistic modelling and formal confirmation theory.

           I have also taught Business English in the framework of a self-help project for ex-drug addicts in Hamburg (2001), worked as a private English teacher (Hamburg, 2000-01), as a software instructor (Amsterdam, 2001), and have spent six months teaching English as a second language (ESL) (Calgary, 2007). I regularly teach Academic Writing, recently at BLCU, Beijing (2017, 2018, 2019), SWUFE, Chengdu (2018), and at Warsaw University of Technology (2019), as well as Critical Thinking with Argument Mapping.

           I received training in didactics at Hamburg University and at Lund University, as well as training in presentation skills (Hamburg, 1994, with distinction). The evaluator for my promotion to associate professor, Prof. Gerhard Schurz, notes: “Frank Zenker has high pedagogical competences and distinct didactic skills which make him a good and versatile teacher, for undergraduates as well as graduate students.”

           Committed to excellence in teaching, I maintain a critically inclusive and respectful learning atmosphere that promotes clarity, self-reflection, and analytical rigor. As an enthusiastic and engaging teacher—who lets students work harder and think for themselves, rather than not—I am very grateful for regularly receiving very positive student feedback. I am always glad to teach new subjects, and at all levels, too.

           Certificates and a teaching-statement are available upon request

 

Courses and Tutorials held (1 hour (h)=60 minutes)

2019     Epistemology, BA level, Bogazici University, Turkey (28h)

2019     Getting Published in international English peer-reviewed academic journals. Warsaw University of Technology, Poland, October 2019 (4h)

2019     Informal Logic with Argument Maps, BA level, Bogazici University, Turkey, June/July 2019 (28h)

2019     Understanding the replication crisis in the social and behavioral sciences, MA/PhD level Bogazici University, Turkey, June/July 2019 (18h)

2019     Academic Writing in English, MA level, BLCU, Beijing, PRC, May/June 2019 (16h)

2019     The empirical study of human reasoning, reasoning, BA level, AMU, Poznan, Poland, May 2019 (12h)

2019     Critical Thinking with Argument Maps, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, PRC, April 2019 (28h)

2019     Argument mapping and public policy (four-day intensive course). EU COST-Action Training School, Nova University Lisbon, Portugal, March 2019 (28h)

2018     Getting Published in International Peer-reviewed Journals. South-Western Uni-versity of Finance and Economics (SWUFE), Chengdu, PRC, October 2018 (12h)

2018     Natural Language Argumentation, the Fallacies, and P-Logic. Tutorial at the 6th Universal Logic School (UNILOG 2018), Vichy, France, June 2018 (3h)

2018     Getting Published in English Language Academic Journals, University of Tongren, PR China (4h).

2018     Academic Writing in English, BA/MA level, BLCU, Beijing, PRC, May (16h)

2018     The empirical study of human reasoning, BA level, AMU, Poznan, Poland (12h)

2017     Fallacies and the Study of Human Reasoning, MA level, AMU, Poznan, Poland (12h)

2017     Argumentation Theory and the Psychology of Reasoning, MA/PhD level, Diego Portales University, Santiago, Chile, October/November 2018 (22h)

2017     Academic Writing in English, BA/MA level, BLCU, Beijing, P.R.C., September 2017 (16h)

2017     Current Issues in Argumentation Theory and the Psychology of Reasoning, MA/PhD level, Sun Yat-sen University, P.R. China (20h)

2016     Argumentation Theory, MA/PhD level, Budapest, Hungary (12h)

2016     Reasoning, MA level, AMU Poznan, Poland (12h), December

2016     Reasoning, MA level, AMU Poznan, Poland (12h), April

2015     Fallacies, Konstanz University, Germany (21h)

2015     Logic for Linguists, University of Hamburg, Germany (21h)

2015     Reasoning, MA level, AMU Poznan, Poland (12h)

2014     Reasoning, MA level, AMU Poznan, Poland (12h)

2013     Reasoning, MA level, AMU, Poznan, Poland (12h)

2012     Reasoning, MA/PhD level, Lund University, Sweden (20h)

2011     Bayesian Argumentation, MA/PhD level, Lund (20h)

2010    Advanced Argumentation, MA/PhD level, Lund (20h)

2007     English as a second language, FOCUS language school, Calgary, AB, Canada (six months at 12-15 hours/week)

2006     Tutorials Epistemology, BA/MA level, Hamburg University, Germany (21h)

2005     Tutorials Logic and Argumentation, BA/MA level, Hamburg University (21h)

2005     Philosophy of Science, MA level, Greifswald University, Germany (20h)

2004     Tutorial, Philosophy of Science, BA/MA level, Hamburg University (2x20h)

2003     Policy Proposal Writing, MA level, Free U. Amsterdam, The Netherlands (20h)

2002     Tutorials Epistemology, BA/MA level, Hamburg University (2x20h)

2002     Lecturer Policy Proposal Writing, MA level, Free U. of Amsterdam (20h)

2002     Tutorials Logic and Argumentation, BA/MA level, Hamburg University (20h)

1998     Tutorials Political Theory, BA/MA level Hamburg University (20h)

1998     Tutorials Introduction to Linguistics, BA/MA, Hamburg University (20h).

1997     Tutorials Logic and Argumentation, BA/MA level, Hamburg University (20h).

1997     Tutorials Introduction to Linguistics, BA/MA level Hamburg University (20h).

1997     Tutorials Introduction to Linguistics, BA/MA level Hamburg University (20h).

 

Guest lectures

2019     Why the replication crisis is your problem too. Warsaw University of Technology, Poland, October 2019.

2019     Three aspects of the effect size: theoretical, statistical, and practical. South-Western University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu, P.R.C, October 2019.

2018     When may I trust empirical results that top-tier journals report? Free University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands, November 2018.

2018     Hypothesis-testing demands trustworthy data. Summer Colloquium, Technical University Berlin, Germany, August 2018.

2018     ‘If, then’-inferences in p-logic. Beijing Normal University, Dpt. of Philosophy, P.R.C., May 2018.

2018     Bayesian confirmation theory, AMU Poznan, Department of Psychology, Poland, March 2018.

2018     From discovery to justification: outline of an ideal research program in empirical psychology. University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, January 2018.

2018     Bayesian argumentation: the state of the art. CRARR, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada, January 2018.

2018     Probabilities in natural language argumentation. PhD program in argumentation, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada, January 2018.

2017     Legal argumentation, University of Concepción, Chile, November 2017.

2017     Getting published in English language academic journals. Beijing Normal University, Beijing, P.R. China, September 2017.

2017     The polysemy of ‘fallacy’—or ‘bias’ for that matter. Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey, May 2017.

2017     What do normative approaches to argumentation stand to gain from rhetorical insights. Huaqiao University, P.R. China, May 2017.

2017     A probabilistic model of argument cogency. Xiamen University (XMU), P.R. China, May 2017.

2017     From discovery to justification: outline of an ideal research program in social psychology. Xiamen University (XMU), P.R. China, May 2017.

2017     Deduction, induction, conduction. Beijing Language and Culture University (BCLU), Beijing, P.R. China, April 2017.

2017     A probabilistic model of argument cogency. Southwestern University of Finance & Economics (SWUFE), Chengdu, P.R. China, March 2017.

2017     Using conceptual spaces to exhibit conceptual continuity through scientific theory change. Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey, February 2017.

2016     Getting published. Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary, Oct 2016.

2016     Do Bayesian models have normative pull on human reasoners? Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey, Oct 2016.

2016     Bayesian argumentation, Workshop at OSSA 11, Windsor, Ontario, Canada, 18 May 2016.

2016     Bayesian argumentation, SAS Bratislava, Slovak Republic. MA, PhD, Postdoc level.

2015     Bias, debias, rebias—or: how to tame critters of the mind. MA and PhD level, AMA University Poznan, Poland.

2015     How the folk-epistemological basis of everyday argument constrains public debate, why we should worry, and what to do about it. BA to PhD level, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

2014     What do normative approaches to argumentation stand to gain from rhetorical insights: Background, MA level, University of Zagreb, Croatia.

2014     What do normative approaches to argumentation stand to gain from rhetorical insights: Application, MA level, University of Zagreb, Croatia.

2011    Conceptual Spaces and Induction, Summer School on Computational Approaches to Argumentation, University of Windsor ON, Canada.

2011    AGM Belief Revision Theory applied to the Philosophy of Science. Study Group on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Cognitive Science, University of Helsinki, Finland.

2007     Ceteris Paribus Everywhere, University of Turku, Finland.

E-Learning

2008     Project Assistant to Prof. Albert Newen, E-Learning project in Elementary Symbolic Logic, University of Bochum, Germany.

2003-05 Project Assistant to Prof. Ulrich Gähde, Visualization of Theory-Structures, University of Hamburg.

Tutor/Teaching Assistant

2002-06 Academic Tutor, Introductions to Logic and Argumentation, Epistemology, and Philosophy of Science, University of Hamburg.

1997-98 Teaching Assistant, Logic and Argumentation, Introduction to Linguistics, Political Theory, University of Hamburg.

Instructor

2007     English as a Second Language, Focus Int. Language Training, Calgary, AB, Canada.

2002-04         Private-Teacher. Business English/Office-Software, Hamburg.

2002   Software Instructor. Computer Academy, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Office Suite.

 

Grants received

Project-Grants, Fellowships, Awards

TUBITAK 2232 Int. Fellowship for Outstanding Researchers (sole applicant): Models, Theories, Research Programs, 2019-2021, No. B.14.2.TBT.0.06.01.02-200-136692 (300.000 EUR)

COST-Action (secondary proposer): European network for argumentation and public policy analysis (APPLY), 2018-2022, No. OC-2017-1-22387, CA17132 (500.000 EUR)

German Academic Exchange Office (Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst), Short Term Readership (Kurzzeitdozentur), Dpt. of Psychology, Diego Portales University, Chile, 15 Oct-15 Nov 2017; Nr. 91647734 (5.000 EUR)

Confucius Institute (HANBAN) “Understanding China”-Fellowship, Institute of Logic and Cognition, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, P.R. China, Feb-May 2017 (3.400 EUR)

Project Grant (sole applicant): Conceptual Spaces, Reasoning, and Argumentation, Volkswagen Foundation, 2015-17, Az.: 90 531 (80.000 EUR)

Marie Skłodowska-Curie COFUND fellow (sole applicant): What ‘fallacy’ means to other-disciplined peers, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, 2016-17, no 1225/02/03 (86.000 EUR)

Project Grant (co-applicant): Judges without Biases: A legal research project on de-biasing in the evaluation of evidence, with C. Dahlman (PI) and F. Sarwar, funded by the Ragnar Söderberg Foundation, 2014-17 (450.000 EUR)

Project Grant (sole applicant): Reconstruction and Evaluation of Pro/Con Arguments, Swedish Research Council, 2011-14, DN.: 421-2010-1536 (290.000 EUR)

Erik Allard Fellowship, Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies (HCAS), January-June 2011, Kone Foundation (18.000 EUR)

Project Grant (sole-applicant): Continuity in Scientific Revolutions, Swedish Research Council, 2008-10 (170.000 EUR)

Project Grant (sub-applicant): Reconstruction and Evaluation of Social Policy Argumentation (with C. Tindale, Windsor, Canada, and H. Wohlrapp, Hamburg, Germany), Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Germany, 2008-12 (45.000 EUR)

Project Grant (sole applicant): Fallacy identification in the pragma-dialectical theory vs. Goldman’s epistemological approach, Förnanders Fond, 2011 (2.500 EUR)

Summer School in Argumentation Theory, Windsor, ON, Canada, June 2009 (fee waiver)

Printing Subsidy, Böhringer Ingelheim Foundation, Germany, 2008 (2.000 EUR)

PostDoc Fellowship (sole-applicant): Lund University, Sweden, The Swedish Institute, November 2007-March 2008 (10.000 EUR)

Visiting Fellowship: University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, June 2006-July 2007 (non-salaried)

Research Fellowship: Dpt. of Philosophy & Cognitive Science, Lund University, Sweden, The Swedish Institute, October 2005-May 2006 (10.000 EUR)

Research Grant: University of Hamburg, Visit to the LSE Lakatos Archives, London, UK, May 2006 (2.000 EUR)

Summer School in Formal Methods, Lund University, Sweden, 2005 (fee waiver).

Exchange-Fellowship: Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA, 1998-99 (15.000 EUR)

 

Conference and Workshop Grants

Conference Grant (co-applicant), Annual meeting of the Nordic Network for Philosophy of Science (NNPS), April 2017, Copenhagen, Denmark, with Henrik Thoren, Hultengrens Fond (4.900 EUR).

Workshop Grant (sole applicant): Int. workshop on fallacies in reasoning and action, 2017, Hultengrens Fund (4.800 EUR).

Conference Grant (co-applicant): Conceptual Spaces@Work, August 2016, Södertörn University, Sweden (with Mauri Kaipainen, Antti Hautamäki, and Peter Gärdenfors), Swedish Research Council (8.500 EUR).

Workshop Grant (sole applicant): Conceptual Spaces 360 planning workshop, Berlin, October 2015, Hultengrens and Elisabeth Rausings Minnesfond Fund (4.800 EUR)

Workshop Grant (co-applicant): International workshop series “The Trinity of Policy-Making: Evidence, Causation and Argumentation,” Finnish Cultural Foundation, 2015-2018, with Carlo Martini (Helsinki, Finland) and Rani Lill Anjum (Ås, Norway) (100.000 EUR).

Conference Grant (sole applicant): Int. Conference on the State of the Art in Research on Reasoning, Argumentation, and Critical Thinking Instruction (RACT 2015), February 2015, funded by the Swedish Research Council (13.500 EUR), Sandblom Fund (6.500 EUR), Rausings Fund (7.000 EUR), AILACT (400 EUR)

Conference Grant (sole applicant): Int. Meeting of the Nordic Network for Philosophy of Science, Lund, March 2014 (NNPS 2014), Hultengrens Fund (6.000 EUR)

Workshop Grant (sub-applicant): Int. Workshop on the Philosophy of Information and Information Quality, May 2013 (with E.J. Olsson & V.F. Hendricks), Einar Hanson Research Fund (6.000 EUR)

Workshop Grant (sub-applicant): Int. Workshop on Social Epistemology, Lund, December 2012 (with V.F. Hendricks and E.J. Olsson), Förnanders Fund (5.000 EUR)

Workshop Grant (sub-applicant): Int. Workshop on Interdisciplinary Project Success, Lund, October 2012 (with J. Persson), Hultengrens Fund (10.000 EUR)

Conference Grant (co-applicant): Int. Conference Conceptual Spaces at Work, Lund, May 2012, Swedish Royal Society of Letters; Swedish Research Council; Science Society Lund (22.000 EUR)

Workshop Grant (sole applicant): Int. Workshop on Formal Methods in Reconstructing Natural Language Argumentation, Konstanz, Germany, Sept 2012 (arranged in cooperation with Georg Brun and Gregor Betz) (4.000 EUR)

Workshop Grant (sub-applicant): Int. Copenhagen-Lund Workshop Series on Social Epistemology (with V.F. Hendricks & E.J. Olsson), Einar Hanson Research Fund, 2011-12 (8.000 EUR)

Workshop Grant (sole applicant): Int. Workshop on Bayesian Argumentation, Lund, October 2010, Wenner-Gren Foundations; Swedish Research Council (12.000 EUR)

 

Travel Grants

Universities of Bremen, Copenhagen, Düsseldorf, Galati, Hamburg, Helsinki, Karlsruhe, Lund, Rochester Institute of Technology, Turku, Windsor, ZIF Bielefeld; BCLU-Beijing, SWUFE-Chengdu, HQU-Huaqiao, XMU-Xiamen, Nakai University, Xi’an Jiaotong University, University of Vittoria-Gasteiz, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Finnish Cultural Foundation; Förnanders Fond, German Research Council (DFG), Rausings Fund, Hultengrens Fund, Vetenskapssocieteten i Lund; Wallenberg Foundation; European Union Erasmus and Erasmus+ Teaching Exchange and Staff Exchange Programs, The Swedish Institute, Slovak Academy of Sciences, COST action (total: ca. 81.500 EUR)

 

Academic Service

Reviewer/rapporteur

Journals: Synthese (24); Cognition (1); Informal Logic (11); Argumentation (13); Review of Symbolic Logic (1); Topoi (5); Erkenntnis (4); Studies in History and Philosophy of Science (2); Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric (1); Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics (1); Argumentation & Computation (2); Cogency (6); Mind & Society (1); Open Environmental Sciences (1); Social Epistemology (1); Philosophia (Israel) (1); Perspectives on Science: Historical, Philosophical, Social (1); Journal of the Philosophy of History (1); Rubriq Peer Review Service (2); Philosophy & Rhetoric (7); The British Journal for Philosophy of Science (1); Peerage of Science (1); Logic and Logical Philosophy (1); Frontiers in Psychology (3); Technologies (1); Palgrave Communication (1); New Ideas in Psychology (1); Cognitive Science (1); TOPICS (2); Research Square (1); Basic and Applied Social Psychology (1).

Publishing houses: Springer, Synthese Library (2 volumes); Peter Lang (1 article); College Publications (2 articles); Oxford University Press (1 article); Springer (2 articles); Bloomsbury (1 article): Palgrave Macmillan (1 proposal).

Conferences: CTF 2009 Proceedings (1); ISSA 2010 Proceedings (2); DIS 2012 (12); L&C 2012 (1); IPS 2012 (25); OSSA 2013 (150); DIS 2013 (8); DIS 2016 (3); DIS 2018 (3); Proceedings of the 2012 Venice Conference on Argumentation, 2013 (1); ECA 2015 (7); ECA 2016 (2); NNPS 2015 (5); NNPS 2016 (3); CS@Work 2016 (5); SLPCS 2016 (1); CoSt16 (2); NNPS 2017 (11); PRW2017 (12); AIC 2018 (1); ArgDiaP 2018 (1); COMMA 2018 (2); CPSN 2018 (1); SEMSPACE 2019 (1).

Institutions: European Union, Horizon 2020, MSC individual fellowships (14), 2017 (11), 2018 (11), 2019 (11); National Science Center, NCN, Poland, 2016 (1), 2017 (1), 2019(1); Italian Ministry for Education, University and Research (MIUR) 2017 (2).

 

Editorial Board Member

Frontiers in Psychology—Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, Review Editor (2017 until present)

Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines (2016 until present)

Palgrave Communications, Associate Editor (2015 until present)

Windsor Studies in Argumentation, electronic book series (2012 until present)

Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy (2011 until present)

Cogency: Journal for Reasoning and Argumentation, Book Review Editor (2009-2013)

 

Defense Committee Member

Jose Vicente Hernández-Conde, Similarity Space Theories and the Problem of Concept Acquisition. University of the Basque Country, Vittoria-Gasteiz, Spain, 26 March 2019.

 

Program and Scientific Committees

Scientific Committee, International Symposium on Reasoning, Argumentation, and Communication (ISRAC 2020), 17-18 October 2020, Southwestern University of Finance & Economics (SWUFE), Chengdu, PRC.

Scientific Committee, International Symposium on Reasoning, Argumentation, and Communication (ISRAC 2019), 12-13 October 2019, Southwestern University of Finance & Economics (SWUFE), Chengdu, PRC.

Program Committee, Workshop on Semantic Spaces at the Intersection of NLP, Physics and Cognitive Science (SEMSPACE 2019), Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Program Committee, 7th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA), 12-14 Sept. 2018, Warsaw, Poland.

Program Committee Member, 3rd European Conference on Argumentation (ECA 2019), Groningen, The Netherlands.

Program Committee Member, Compositional Approaches in Physics, NLP, and the Social Sciences (2018), University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, France.

Program Committee Member, 6th Int. Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Cognition (AIC 2018), Naples, Italy.

Scientific Committee Member, Nordic Network for Philosophy of Science (NNPS 2017), Aarhus, Denmark.

Program Committee Member, Int. workshop on Semantic Spaces at the Intersection of NLP, Physics, and Cognitive Science, Glasgow, Scotland, June 2016.

Program Committee Member, Nordic Network for Philosophy of Science (NNPS 2016), April 2016, Tartu, Estland.

Program Committee Member, Conceptual Spaces at Work (CS@WORK2016), August 2016, Södertörn University, Sweden.

Program Committee Member, 3rd Meeting of the Nordic Network for Philosophy of Science (NNPS 2015), April 2015, Helsinki, Finland.

Program Committee Member, 10th Int. Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA) 2013, Windsor, Ontario, Canada.

Program Committee Member, Logic and Cognition (L&C 2012), Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland, May 2012.

Program Committee, Dani Ivo Skaric (DIS), International Conference on Rhetoric, Postira, Croatia, April 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018.

 

Service to Professional Organizations

Steering Committee Member, European Conference on Argumentation (ECA), 2013-present.

Director-at-Large and webmaster, Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking (AILACT), 2011-13, 2013-15, 2015-2017.

Chair, eColloq on Argumentation, Online speaker series on Argumentation, 2011-2014.

Founding and Steering Committee Member, Lund PostDoc Society, 2010-2015.

Treasurer, Philosophical Society, Lund, Sweden, 2009-2012.

Student Representative & Organizer of Orientation Programs, University of Hamburg, Germany, 1995-98.

 

Meetings Arranged

  1. Co-organizer: COST-Action CA17132, European network for argumentation and public policy analysis (APPLY), WG-2 work group meeting: Title pending, Budapest, Hungary, October 2020 (w/ G. Zemplen & J.A. an Laar).
  2. Co-organizer: COST-Action CA17132, European network for argumentation and public policy analysis (APPLY), WG-2 work group meeting: Politicizing and Depoliticizing Climate Change, Poznan, Poland, 24-25 October 2019 (with M. Urbanski & J.A. van Laar).
  3. Co-organizer: International Symposium on Reasoning, Argumentation, and Communication (ISRAC2019), Southwestern University of Finance and Economy (SWUFE), Chengdu, P.R. China, 12-13 October 2019.
  4. Main Organizer: Symposium on Argument Strength. 3rd European Conference on Argumentation (ECA2019), Groningen, The Netherlands.
  5. Main Organizer: COST Training Workshop, Argument mapping and public policy, Nova University Lisbon, Portugal, 15-18 March 2019.
  6. Main Organizer: Fallacies: Strategy, Error, Shortcut. Int. Workshop at Poznan Reasoning Week 2017 (PRW2017), Poznan, Poland, 6-7 July 2017 (w/ P. Lupowski).
  7. Organizer: Reasoning in Conceptual Spaces. Workgroup meeting, Södertörn, Sweden, 23-24 August 2016.
  8. Organizer: Reasoning in Conceptual Spaces. Workgroup meeting, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 28-29 June 2016.
  9. Organizer: Reasoning in Conceptual Spaces. Workgroup meeting, Windsor, Canada, 16-17 May, 2016.
  10. Organizer: Int. Workshop on aspects of defeasible reasoning, University of Konstanz, Germany, 4 May, 2016.
  11. Organizer: Workshop on Bayesian Argumentation, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia, 28 April 2016.
  12. Organizer: Int. Workshop on argumentation in evidence based policy-making (with Fabrizio Macagno), ArgLab, New University of Lisbon, 3-4 March 2016.
  13. Organizer: CS360 Research Group Meeting, 16-17 October 2015, Berlin, Germany.
  14. Main Organizer: ‘Publish or perish was yesterday’; today we ‘innovate or fade’ (with Maryam Olsson), Lund PostDoc Society Skills Seminar, May 2015.
  15. Main Organizer: International Conference on the State of the Art in Research on Reasoning, Argumentation, and Critical Thinking Instruction (RACT2015), 25-27 February 2015, Lund University.
  16. Main Organizer: Where’d my day go? Productivity, enabling (social) technologies, on-the-job training (with Paula Quinon). Lund PostDoc Society Skills Seminar, February 2015.
  17. Main Organizer: Meet the reviewers (with Paula Quinon), Lund PostDoc Society Skills Seminar, December 2014.
  18. Main Organizer: What you had always wanted to know about your career at Lund University, but were afraid to ask (with Paula Quinon), Lund PostDoc Society Skills Seminar, October 2014.
  19. Main Organizer: The nitty-gritty of the publication process: writing, editing, reviewing. Lund PostDoc Society Skills Seminar (with Paula Quinon), Lund, May 2014
  20. Main Organizer: The nitty-gritty of the publication process: writing, editing, reviewing. Lund PostDoc Society Skills Seminar (with Paula Quinon), Lund, May 2014.
  21. Organizer and Chair: Nordic Network for Philosophy of Science (NNPS) Meeting, Lund, March 2014.
  22. Main Organizer: Obtaining and Managing Large Scale Grants. Lund PostDoc Society Skills Seminar (with Paula Quinon), Lund, November 2013.
  23. Main Organizer: Int. Workshop on the Philosophy of Information and Information Quality (with Vincent F. Hendricks and Erik J. Olsson), Lund, May 2013.
  24. Main Organizer: Five International Copenhagen-Lund Workshops in Social Epistemology (with Carlo Proietti), Copenhagen and Lund, 2010-12.
  25. Chair: eColloq on Argumentation, Int. Online Colloquium, 2011 (3); 2012 (3); 2013 (3), 2014 (2).
  26. Main Organizer: International Workshop: What is Interdisciplinary Success? (with Johannes Persson and Henrik Thoren), Lund, October 2012.
  27. Main Organizer: Int. Workshop Formal Methods in Reconstructing Natural Language Arguments (with Georg Brun and Gregor Betz), GAP.8, Konstanz, Germany, Sept 2012.
  28. Organizer: International Conference Conceptual Spaces at Work (with Peter Gärdenfors), Lund, Sweden, May 2012.
  29. Co-organizer: International Workshop: Perspectives on Structuralism (with Holger Andreas), Center for Advanced Studies, Munich, Germany, February 2012.
  30. Organizer: International Conference, European Epistemology Network (EEN) Meeting, Lund, 17-19 March 2011.
  31. Organizer: Int. Workshop Bayesian Argumentation, Lund, 22-23 October 2010.
  32. Co-Organizer: Hamburg/Lund Workshop on Theory Revision (with Ulrich Gähde), Thyssen Foundation, Hamburg, Germany, May 2005.
  33. Assistant to the Organizers: 6th ISSA Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands, June 2002.

 

Invited Talks

  1. (2019i). What a traceable account is not. Keynote speech, 3rd int. Symposium on Reasoning, Argumentation, and Communication (ISRAC 2019), South-Western University of Finance and Economics (SWUFE), Chengdu, PRC, October 2019.
  2. (2019h). Streiten aber richtig (“Debating well”). Online-seminar on argument mapping, Digitale Helden gGmbh, Frankfurt, Germany, August 2019.
  3. (2019g). The effect size’s three aspects. Dokma research group, AMU, Cognitive Science, Poznan, Poland, May 2019.

4.     (2019f). Die Replikationsfähigkeit empirischer Studien als Problem angewandter psychologischer Theorie. (An empirical study’s replicability as a problem for applied psychological theory.) Institut für Systemische Studien, Hamburg, Germany, May 2019.

5.     (2019e). Why replication is your problem, too. 4th Nankai University Forum for Distinguished Scholars, Nankai University, Tianjin, PRC, April 2019.

6.     (2019d). Fostering Critical Thinking with Argument Mapping—Why does it succeed? Xi’An Jiaotong University, PRC, April 2019.

7.     (2019c). Why replication is your problem, too. Xi’an Jiaotong University, PRC, April 2019.

8.     (2019c). Why replication is your problem, too. ArgLab Research Colloquium, Nova University, Lisbon, Portugal, March 2019.

9.     (2019b). The Replication crisis, research programs, and theoretical progress. Dpt. of Philosophy, Bagacizi University, Istanbul, Turkey, February 2019.

10. (2019a). Conceptual spaces, natural concepts, and convexity. Cognitive Science Program, Bagacizi University, Istanbul, Turkey, February 2019.

11. (2018b). How not to play the scientific discovery game. International Symposium on Reasoning, Argumentation, and Communication (ISRAC 2018), SWUFE, Chengdu, PRC, October 2018.

12. (2018a). Critical thinking instruction & base rates. University of Tongren, PRC, May 2018.

13. (2017f). Policy and management in German higher education. Beijing Language and Culture University, Beijing, P.R.C, HANBAN Forum, May 2018.

14. (2017e). From Discovery to Justification. Department of Psychology, AMU, Poznan, Poland, December 2017.

15. (2017d). Bayesian Argumentation: the state of the art. University of Lodz, Poland, December 2017.

16. (2017c). From Discovery to Justification. University of Concepción, Chile, November 2017.

17. (2017b). Bayesian Argumentation. International Conference on Argumentation and the Psychology of Reasoning. Diego Portales University, Santiago, Chile, November 2017.

18. (2017a). Getting published. Beijing Language and Culture University (BLCU), Beijing, PRC, April 2017.

19. (2016f). A conceptual analysis of fallacy. Dokma Research Group, Poznan, Poland, December 2016.

  1. (2016e). Can Bayesian models have normative pull on human reasoners? Dpt. of Philosophy, Bagacizi University, Istanbul, Turkey, October 2016.

21. (2016d). Being (un)objectionable. Int. workshop ‘Aspects of defeasible reasoning’. Konstanz University, Germany, May 2016.

  1. (2016c). The polysemy of fallacy. Dpt. of Philosophy, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary, April 2016.

23. (2016b). Denying antecedents probabilified and dialectified. What if-research group, Konstanz University, Germany, May 2016.

24. (2016a). Why a nuanced view on human reasoning errors remains desirable. University of Trnava, Slovakia, March 2016.

25. (2015i). What do we mean by ‘fallacy’? Logic colloquium, Konstanz University, Germany, November 2015.

26. (2015h). Conceptual Spaces and Radical Theory Change. Instituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione (ISTC), Rome, Italy, September 2015.     

27. (2015g). with Ulrike Hahn, Fallacies in Legal and Everyday Reasoning:

 A Bayesian Account of Argument Strength. Int. workshop on models of rational proof in criminal law. Interdisciplinary Research Center (ZIF), Bielefeld, Germany, September 2015.

28. (2015f). What ‘fallacy’ means to other-disciplined peers. University of Groningen, The Netherlands, June 2015.

29. (2015e). What ‘fallacy’ means to other-disciplined peers. Birkbeck, University of London, UK, May 2015.

30. (2015d). Motivation, cognition, technologies: Three underappreciated factors in developing our second (argumentative) nature. Department of Media, Cognition and Communication, University of Copenhagen, Denmark, March 2015.

31. (2015c). Developing our second (argumentative) nature, ArgLab, New University of Lisbon, Portugal, March 2015.

32. (2015b). Reliable debiasing techniques? Implications for critical thinking instruction. Rochester Institute of Technology, N.Y., USA, February 2015.

33. (2015a). The four-fold path to debiasing: Cognition, motivation, technology, and error avoidance. Center for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation, and Rhetoric, University of Windsor, Canada, February 2015.

34. (2014b). Logic, reasoning, and argumentation: Insights from the wild. Croatian Phonetic Association, Zagreb, Croatia.

35. (2014a). Reasoning errors. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.

36. (2013d). Reasoning errors. Higher Seminar, Gothenburg University, Sweden.

37. (2013c). What fallacies are not. International Workshop on Argumentation and Rational Decisions, ArgLab, New University of Lisbon, Portugal.

  1. (2013b). Denkfehler—Anmerkungen zur experimentellen Erforschung menschlicher Rationalität (Reasoning Errors—Remarks on the experimental study of human rationality). Technical University Dortmund, Germany.
  2. (2013a). The Conjunction Fallacy as a Challenge for Social Epistemology: Daniel Kahneman meets Jaako Hintikka. Epistemology workshop, University of Bochum, Germany.
  3. (2012e). Reconstructing Conceptual Change with Conceptual Spaces. Int. Workshop on Cognitive and Computational Modeling of Conceptual Change in Learning Science and Science Education, Helsinki, Finland.
  4. (2012d). From Pro/Con to Compromise. 14th Biennial Argumentation Conference, Casa Artom, Venice, Italy.
  5. (2012c). Theory Change as Dimensional Change. Int. Conference Conceptual Spaces at Work, Lund University, Sweden.
  6. (2012b). Logic, Cognition, and Natural Language Argumentation. Key Note, Int. Conference Logic & Cognition, Poznan, Poland.
  7. (2012a). From Pro/Con to Compromise. CRRAR research seminar, University of Windsor, ON, Canada.
  8. (2011c). Evaluating Expert Argumentation. Law Faculty, Lund University, Sweden.
  9. (2011b). Ceteris Paribus Laws as Epistemic Deficits. Int. Workshop on Ceteris Paribus Reasoning and Laws, Lund University.
  10. (2011a). The German National Ethics Council on human Embryonic Stem Cell Research (hESCR) and Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD). Real Arguments-Conference, Hamburg, Germany.
  11. (2010b). Epistemic Norms. Dpt. of Philosophy, University of Aarhus, Denmark, May 2010.
  12. (2010a). Analyzing Social Policy Argumentation. Communication and Argumentation in the Public Sphere (CAPS 4). Galati, Romania (invited 3 hour workshop).
  13. (2009). Reconstruction and Evaluation of Conductive Argumentation. Dpt. of Rhetoric, Communication & Media Studies. University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
  14. (2008d). Conductive Argumentation and Pareto Optimality. Center for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric, University of Windsor, ON, Canada.
  15. (2008c). Implicit vs. explicit Representation of ceteris paribus conditions in empirical theories. Research Colloquium, University of Düsseldorf, Germany.
  16. (2008b). The 2007 Argumentation of the National German Ethics Council regarding an amendment of the stem cell law: A case of compromise revision. International workshop on social policy argumentation, University of Windsor, Ontario.
  17. (2008a). Subjective Protection Rights of an Embryo in Abortion and Stem Cell Research, Higher Seminar in Practical Philosophy, Lund University, Sweden.
  18. (2007f). Structuralism, Conceptual Spaces and Continuity across Paradigm Shifts. Science in Flux-Workshop, Philosophy Department, Lund, Sweden.
  19. (2007e). Ceteris Paribus Everywhere, Philosophy Dpt., University of Turku, Finland.
  20. (2007d). Fallacy Detection in Pragma Dialectics. Society for Argumentation, Turku, Finland.
  21. (2007c). Finite Ceteris Paribus Clauses, Philosophy Dpt., University of Windsor, ON, Canada.
  22. (2007b). The Protection Right of a Human Embryo in Abortion and Stem Cell Research, Philosophy Department, University of Windsor, ON, Canada.
  23. (2007a). Specifying Ceteris Paribus. A Comparison of recent formal approaches, History and Philosophy of Science Research Group, University of Calgary, AB, Canada.
  24. (2006). Popper’s Deductive Predictions, Ceteris Paribus Clause and AGM Belief Revision, HPS Research Group, University of Calgary, AB, Canada.
  25. (2005). Ceteris Paribus in Epistemic Change. Research Seminar, University of Bremen, Germany.

 

Presentations

  1. (2019c). What a traceable account is not. APPLY Cost Action, WG-2 meeting, Poznna, Poland, 25-26 Oct 2019.
  2.  (2019b). The Bayesian approach to argument strength. 3rd European Conference on Argumentation (ECA2019), Groningen, The Netherlands, 25-27 June 2019.
  3. (2019a). What a traceable account is not. 3rd European Conference on Argumentation (ECA2019), Groningen, The Netherlands, June 2019.
  4. (2018g). Hypothesis-testing demands trustworthy data. 51st Congress of the German Society for Psychology (DGPs2018), Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany, 15-20 September 2018.
  5. (2018f). How not to play the scientific discovery game. Poznan Reasoning Week 2018, AMU Poznan, Poland, 11-15 September 2018.
  6. (2018e). What a t-test easily hides. Entia & Nomina Workshop in Formal Epistemology 2018, University of Gdansk, Poland, August 2018.
  7. (2018d). A simulation approach to inferential statistics based on the research program strategy (RPS). 8th Congress of the European Methodology Association (EAM), Jena, Germany, 27 July 2018.
  8. (2018c). How not to aggregate reasons. 9th ISSA Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 5 July 2018.
  9. (2018b). How not to aggregate reasons. Argument Strength workshop, IRIT, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France, 12 April 2018.
  10. (2018a). From discovery to justification. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, Lund University, Sweden, 6 February 2018.
  11. (2017f). Gründe geben [Giving reasons]. QUA-LiS NRW Workgroup on Argumentation and Scientific Literary, Essen, 29 September 2017.
  12. (2017e). Outline of an ideal research program in empirical psychology and elsewhere. Ethics & Information Technologies research group, Hamburg, Germany, 8 September 2017.
  13. (2017d). Expert disagreement exceeding measurement uncertainty is unreasonable. Int. Conference on Trust, Expert Opinion & Policy, Dublin, Ireland, 31 August-2 September 2017.
  14. (2017c). The strength of co-value argumentation. Int. conference on values in argumentation, ArgLab, New University of Lisbon, Portugal, 28-29 June 2017.
  15. (2017b). Can Bayesian models have “normative pull” on human reasoners? 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg, Switzerland, 20-23 June 2017.
  16. (2017a). A probabilistic analysis of argument cogency. Higher seminar in theoretical philosophy, Lund University, Sweden, January 2017.
  17. (2016f). A probabilistic analysis of argument cogency. Argument Strength workshop, RUB, Bochum, Germany, November 2016.
  18. (2016e). Can Bayesian models have normative pull on human reasoners? Poznan Reasoning Week, AMU, Poznan, Poland, September 2016.
  19. (2016d). Reasoning in Conceptual Spaces. Södertörn University, Sweden, August 2016.
  20. (2016c). The polysemy of ‘fallacy’—or ‘bias’, for that matter. OSSA11, Windsor, ON, Canada, May 2016
  21. (2016b). What is that thing called ‘fallacy’. DIS 2016, Brac, Croatia, April 2016.
  22. (2016a). Towards a use-based account of ‘fallacy’. Bratislava, Slovakia, February 2016.
  23. (2015l). What do we mean by ‘fallacy’? Higher Seminar, Lund University, Sweden, October 2015.
  24. (2015k). From Classical Mechanics to Quantum Theory and Special Relativity Theory. EPSA15, Düsseldorf, Germany, September 2015.
  25. (2015j). From Classical Mechanics to Quantum Theory and Special Relativity Theory. Poster presentation, GAP.9, Osnabrück, Germany, September 2015.
  26. (2015i). The Rule of Law as a debiasing technique. International conference on Rule of Law, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, June, 2015.

27. (2015h). What ‘fallacy’ means to other-disciplined peers. Slovakian Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, June 2015.

  1. (2015g). May the better argument win: debiasing in legal decision making contexts. ECA2015, Lisbon, Portugal, June 2015.

29. (2015f) Lies, dam lies and models. Higher seminar in theoretical philosophy, Lund University, Sweden.

  1. (2015e). Why developed societies require (more) innovation. LPS seminar co-arranged with Lund University Innovation Systems, Lund, May 2015.
  2. (2015c). Conceptual Spaces, Structural Realisms, and Continuity in Theory Change. Annual Meeting of the Nordic Network for Philosophy of Science, Helsinki, Finland, April 2015.
  3. (2015b). Conceptual Spaces and Radical Theory Change. 42nd Annual Philosophy of Science Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, April 2015.
  4. (2015a). Debiasing in Legal Contexts. RACT 2015, Lund University, February, 2015.
  5. (2014f). Reliable Debiasing Techniques? Critical Remarks on a Darker Corner of the Social Science Universe. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, Lund University, December 2014.
  6. (2014g). Argumentation from pairing a language with strategic goals (with Justine Jacot and Emmanuel Genot). 8th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, July 2014.
  7. (2014f). Denying the Antecedent Probabilized. 8th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, July 2014.
  8. (2014e). Denying the Antecedent Probabilized. Giornate tridentine di rhetorica (GTR14). Faculty of Law, University of Trento, Italy, June 2014.
  9. (2014d). Editing books and special issues–tools, trouble, fun. luPOD Skills Seminar, Lund University, May 2014.
  10. (2014c). Evaluating probabilistic versions of denying the antecedent. DIS 2014, Brac, Croatia, April 2014.
  11. (2014c). Of drunks and streetlamps: The rational merits of denying antecedents and affirming consequents (with David Godden). 15th Biennial Argumentation Conference, Wake Forest University, N.C, USA, April 2014.
  12. (2014b). Heuristics, total evidence and then some: What DA and AC arguments tend to leave implicit. Higher Seminar for Theoretical Philosophy, Lund University, March 2014.
  13. (2014a). Reasoning Errors. Law Faculty, University of Lund, Jan, 2014.
  14. (2013g). Reasoning Errors. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, Lund University, Dec 2013.
  15. (2013f). Commentary on Fabio Paglieri’s “On the rationality of argumentative decisions,” ArgLab Workshop, Lisbon, Dec 2013.
  16. (2013e). Commentary on Mark Battersby and Sharon Bailin’s “Critical Thinking and Cognitive Biases. 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA). Windsor, ON, Canada, May 2013.
  17. (2013d). Know Thy Biases. 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA). Windsor, ON, Canada, May 2013.
  18. (2013c). Know Thy Biases. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, Lund, May 2013.
  19. (2013b). Reconstructing Conceptual Change Generally. Nordic Philosophy of Science Meeting, Uppsala, April 2013.
  20. (2013a). Fighting to Combat Biased Reasoning in the Classroom. Annual Meeting of the American Philosophical Association (APA), Central Division, New Orleans, LA, USA, February 2013. Joint session of the Association of Informal Logic and Critical Thinking and the American Association of Philosophy Teachers.
  21. (2012j). What do Normative Approaches to Argumentation Stand to Gain from Rhetorical Insights? Communication Department Research Seminar, Lund University, Nov 2010.
  22. (2012i). Commentary on Ulrike Hahn “The Bayesian Approach to Argumentation,” GAP.8 workshop Formal Methods in Argument Reconstruction, Sept. 2012, Konstanz, Germany.
  23. (2012h). What do normative Approaches to Argumentation Stand to Gain from Rhetorical Insights. Working Seminar, Lund University, September 2012.
  24. (2012g). Popular Science Presentation. luPOD personal development Program, Venn, Sweden, August 2012.
  25. (2012f). Reasonable Disagreement in Pro-et-Contra Argumentation. European Epistemology Network Meeting, Bologna, Italy, June 2012.
  26. (2012e). The Explanatory Value of Cognitive Asymmetry in Policy Controversies. Int. Conference Between Scientists and Citizens, Ames, IO, USA, June 2012.
  27. (2012d). The Explanatory Value of Cognitive Asymmetry in Policy Controversies. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, Lund, May 2012.
  28. (2012c). Theory Change as Dimensional Change. Int. Conference Conceptual Spaces at Work, Lund, Sweden, May 2012.
  29. (2012b). Theory Change as Dimensional Change. Int. Conference Progress in Science, Tilburg, The Netherlands, April 2012.
  30. (2012a). What is Suasory Information? Days of Ivo Skaric, First Int. Conference on Rhetoric, Postira, Croatia, April 2012.
  31. (2011i). Foundations for Nothing and Facts for Free. A Challenge for the Dialectical Egalitarian. 3rd eColloq on Argumentation, Oct. 2011.
  32. (2011h). Experts and Bias. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, Lund, Oct. 2011.
  33. (2011g). Academic Etiquette. Lund University Postdoc Seminar (luPOD), Oct 2011.
  34. (2011f). Designing a Course in Elementary Symbolic Logic within Blackboard. Third International Congress on Tools for Teaching Logic, Salamanca, Spain, June 2011.
  35. (2011e). Commentary on Fabrizio Macagno’s “Implicatures and Hierarchies of Presumption.” International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, Windsor, Ontario, Canada, May 2011.
  36. (2011d). Foundations for Nothing and Facts for Free. International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, Windsor, Ontario, Canada, May 2011.
  37. (2011c). Theory Change as Dimensional Change. Philosophy of Science Research Group, Department of Philosophy, University of Helsinki, April 2011.
  38. (2011b). Two Models for Reconstructing Theory Change. Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies Brown Bag Seminar, Helsinki, Finland, March 2011.
  39. (2011a). In Support of the Rhetoric-as-Epistemic Thesis. Rhetoric in Society III, Antwerp, Belgium, January 2011.
  40. (2010m). Modeling Pro/Con Argument in a Bayesian Framework. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, University of Lund, November 2010.
  41. (2010l). Beyond the Priors: Modeling Framing Effects in Pro/Con Argument. International workshop on Bayesian Argumentation, University of Lund, October 2010.
  42. (2010k). Arguers as Strategist: Are we really integrating rhetorical insights? Argument and Persuasion Symposium, École des hautes etudes en sciences sociales, Paris, Sept. 2010.
  43. (2010j). Why study the transition between is and ought anyways? On the conventional validity of the pragma-dialectical rules. 7th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), Amsterdam, June 2010.
  44. (2010i). Academic Networking. luPOD Seminar, Lund University Postdoctoral Program, Sweden, May 2010
  45. (2010h). Free Speech, Pragma-Dialectics, and Epistemic Norms of Argumentation. Com­munication & Argumentation in the Public Sphere (CAPS 4). Galati, Romania, May 2010.
  46. (2010g). Deduction, Induction, Conduction. Symposium on Conductive Arguments. University of Windsor, ON, Canada, May 2010.
  47. (2010f). The Canadian Debate on Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. TransCoop Workshop on Social Policy Argumentation, University of Windsor, ON, April 2010.
  48. (2010e). Reconstruction of Theory-Dynamics without Incommensurability or Aprioricity. Humanities and Theology Days, University of Lund, April 2010.
  49. (2010d). Fitting Epistemic Norms into Pragma-Dialectics. Whose Problem Anyways? Where is Your Argument-Conference, University of Manchester, UK, April 2010.
  50. (2010c). Bayesian Argumentation. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, University of Lund, April 2010.
  51. (2010b). Deduction, Induction, Conduction: An Attempt at Unifying Natural Language Argument Structure. 13th SCA/AFA Biennial Wake Forest Argumentation Conference on Argumentation. Winston Salem, NC, USA, March 2010.
  52. (2010a). Modeling Scientific Change in Conceptual Spaces. Institute Lecture, Dpt. of Philosophy & Cognitive Science, Lund, February 2010.
  53. (2009h). Modeling Pro/Contra Argumentation. TransCoop Workshop, University of Hamburg, Germany, December 2009.
  54. (2009g). The Role of Free Speech in the Pragma-Dialectical Model of a Critical Discussion. Epistemology Research Group, University of Copenhagen, Denmark, December 2009.
  55. (2009f). Deduction, Induction, Conduction. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, Lund, November 2009.
  56. (2009e). Frames, Conceptual Spaces and Large Scale Theory Change. International Conference on Concept Types and Frames in Language and Cognition, Dusseldorf, Germany, August 2009.
  57. (2009d). A Critique of Paul Thagard’s Explanatory Coherence. Philosophy Days, University of Lund, June 2009.
  58. (2009c). Commentary on J. Plug’s “Telling Examples. Strategic Manoeuvring in Plenary Debates in the European Parliament,” OSSA 2009, Windsor, ON, Canada.
  59. (2009b). Reconstructive Charity, Soundness and the RSA-Criteria of Good Argumentation. OSSA, Windsor, ON, Canada, June 2009.
  60. (2009a). Thagard’s Explanatory Coherence. Higher Seminar in Theoretical Philosophy, University of Lund, March 2009.
  61. (2008b). On the Reconstruction of Revolutionary Theory Change. International workshop, Paris, France, December 2008.
  62. (2008a). Theoretical Virtues, Objections and Some Thoughts from Theory Revision. Research Colloquium, Dpt. of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam, February 2008.
  63. (2007b). Ceteris Paribus Clauses in Assessing Conductive Argumentation. 2007 NCA/AFA Summer Conference on Argumentation, Alta, Utah, USA, July 2007.
  64. (2007a). Pragma-Dialectic’s Necessary Condition for a Critical Discussion. 7th Int. Conference, Ontario Society Study of Argumentation (OSSA), University of Windsor, ON, Canada, June 2007.
  65. (2006b). Ceteris Paribus in Conservative Epistemic Change. 6th Int. Conference of the German Society for Analytical Philosophy (GAP), Berlin, August 2006.
  66. (2006a). Changes in Conduct Rules and Ten Commandments. 6th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), Amsterdam, Netherlands, July 2006.
  67. (2005b). Auxiliary Hypotheses for Explaining failed Predictions in Data from Language Acquisition (with Tanja Kupisch). Meeting of the European Society for Philosophy & Psychology (ESPP), Lund, Sweden, June 2005.
  68. (2005a). Ceteris Paribus as Completeness Assumptions. Lund/Hamburg Workshop on Theory Revision, Hamburg, Germany, May 2005.
  69. (2004). Consistency and Deductive Closure in Belief-Revision. Lund/Hamburg Workshop on Theory Revision, Lund, Sweden, June 2005.


Memberships

German Society for Analytical Philosophy (GAP); German Society for Philosophy (DGPhil); International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA); Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking (AILACT); Centre du Recherche Théorie et Pratique du Discours, University of Galati, Romania; The Nordic Pragmatism Network; Rhetoric Society of Europe; The Nordic Network for Philosophy of Science

[1] https://lu.academia.edu/FrankZenker reports some 100 document views per month, consistently ranking in the top 2-5%. Number of co-authors: 17



Science discipline: 1.2 philosophy : 100 %
Report creator
Change profile photo
Allowed files type: JPG, PNG, GIF.
Pick file

Get link to the record


* presented value of the Hirsch index is approximative calculation obtained in the Repository based on the scientist's publications (including autocitations) in the Repository and Internet information analysis. The value is close to the value obtained with the Publish or Perish system. In general it is higher than the value given by the Scopus or Web of Science sites. In the case of undervalued number, first of all take care of completeness of the Repository.
Back
Log in
Please log in first.
Confirmation
Are you sure?