What makes new theories so convincing that they can become established in the scientific community? What persuasive forces transform a heterodox theory into an orthodox one? And why does a heterodox theory remain credible to its adherents even as a heterodox theory? The question of the causes of theory change is as widely debated as it is unresolved. The only thing that seems undisputed is that not only do logical and empirical justifications play a role in the course of scientific change, but neither does it seem to be fully accounted for by an analysis of power dynamics and group psychology. The work of persuasion and legitimization is carried out in a wide variety of ways: The pressure to justify oneself within the scientific community consistently gives rise to strategies that make use of manipulative influence, anecdotes, examples, thought experiments, crisis narratives, radical scientific theories, and epistemologies, among other things. We would like to take a nuanced look at this broad spectrum of persuasive forces. However, the conference is not intended merely to examine the transformation of theories—that is, the transition from heterodoxy to orthodoxy—but also to focus on forces of persuasion that can lend plausibility to the persistence of theories. Why do heterodoxies—which have failed to establish themselves and remain permanently outside the scientific consensus—nevertheless exert such a persistent power of persuasion on their followers?

The conference is part of the research program of the interdisciplinary project “Heterodoxies” at the WIN Kolleg of the Heidelberg Academy of Sciences and Humanities.