June 2026 edition of the Society for the Philosophy of Science in Practice Newsletter included my piece on the promises and limitations of digital methodology in the study of scientific practice. It is available here: SPSP June 2026 Newsletter
Here you can find the poster:
Recently, after finishing writing a co-authored paper, it turned out that doing references is still absolutely terrifying for some of my colleagues, and I realized that the way I have set up my process is actually much less popular (at least in philosophy) than I realized - hence I thought that sharing what works for me might help some people working in Humanities figure out a process that works best for them. A lot of the things have grown over time, so probably could be simplified in some way, but I’m waiting for another procrastination period to tweak it some more.
In this paper (available here), I argue that existing criticism about what is “morphological computation” due to Müller & Hoffmann is in fact a debate on what “computation” is and doesn’t provide much insight into the “morphological” part. I analyze their view to show that it is a semantic approach to computation, and then propose that alternative mechanistic view helps us understand better scientific practices in research fields adjacent to basal cognition, more precisely - research on morphogenesis.
This paper (available here) has grown from my attempt to figure out what is “the predictive processing view” on consciousness and realization that not only there are a lot of alternatives, but also they exist parallel to one another, apparently with some of the authors not aware of a lot of the research being done concurrently. So I wrote a term paper charting a map of those approaches and then expanded it into the final form, submitting it to a special issue on theories of consciousness.