What to do when Free Inquiry Meets Politially-Motivated Bad Faith Dissent is typically a good thing in science. It helps us to correct false beliefs and advance science. However, certain dissent may be problematic. Two exemplar cases are climate denialism and dissent against a causal link between smoking and cancer. This spurious dissent has been used, sometimes in bad faith, to obscure the truth about scientific issues and introduce widespread ignorance and unwarranted doubt. One proposed method to deal with spurious dissent is to hide it, such as by hindering it during the peer review process. However, the effectiveness of such a strategy has been questioned. Using network modeling Dr. Matthew Coates moves this debate forward by simulating the effects of such suppression in scientific communities. The simulation suggests new explanations of the data used in these debates. The picture that emerges supports the conclusion that suppressing even spurious dissent tends to harm science; while also pointing to the specific conditions when doing so would be epistemically appropriate. Dr. Coates is an assistant teaching professor in Philosophy and PPEL at BGSU. His primary research interests are in computational philosophy and evolutionary game theory. He's published works in Philosophy of Science, Biology, and Epistemology, while teaching economics at the University of California at Irvine, where he earned his Ph.D. in 2025. This is a PPEL Circle invited talk, sponsored by the BGSU Philosophy, Politics, Economics and Law (PPEL) program.  Free and open to the public.   

  How does the ethics of research of reproductive healthcare change in a growingly dangerous political climate for pregnant people? As patients continue to experience restrictions regarding their reproductive healthcare and access to abortion, the balance between the individual risks of participation and the social benefit of the research may change. In her presentation, Dr. Dana Howard uses a case study of a previous risky research program to explore how contemporary ethical standards of research integrity may prove inadequate for the challenges of reproductive healthcare research in a post-Roe era.  Dr. Dana Howard is a philosophy faculty member at The Ohio State University with a primary appointment in the The Ohio State University Center for Bioethics, College of Medicine. Prior to coming to OSU, Dana was a post-doctoral fellow in the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health. This event is sponsored by the BGSU Philosophy, Politics, Economics and Law (PPEL) program. Free and open to the public.   

9:30- Welcome Brunch  Start your day at the Welcome Brunch on the Shatzel Hall Porch beginning at 9:30 a.m. Reconnect with familiar faces, meet new ones and ease into the day with great company and conversation. At 10:30 a.m., enjoy a special guest speaker – a meaningful highlight of the reunion experience. 5:00 p.m.- Bratwurst and Beer  Later in the evening, unwind at Arlyn’s Good Beer for a casual hangout featuring Salzburg Alumni Lager, a 50/50 raffle, giant Jenga, cornhole and plenty of great conversation. Whether you join for the morning, the evening or both, it’s a day built around reconnection and celebration. Planning to attend? Please RSVP by Sept. 2 by emailing lindav@bgsu.edu