Paul Franco (University of Washington, Seattle)
I draw upon speech-act theory to understand the speech-acts appropriate to the multiple aims of scientific practice and the role of nonepistemic values in evaluating speech-acts made relative to those aims. First, I look at work that distinguishes explaining from describing within scientific practices. I then argue speech-act theory provides a framework to make sense of how explaining, describing, and other acts have different felicity conditions. Finally, I argue that if explaining aims to convey understanding to particular audiences rather than describe literally across all contexts, then evaluating explanatory acts directed to the public or policymakers involves asking nonepistemic questions.
