All scientific collaborations involve philosophical work: the work of ‘aligning’ methods, values, objects of study etc in the context of a particular project, This sort of ‘local’ philosophical work is typically carried out in an ad hoc fashion by members of the collaboration themselves. We want to discuss ways in which philosophers might contribute constructively to this ‘local’ philosophical work. That is, what is involved in philosophers serving as facilitators (or midwives) of the conceptual coordination work that any collaborative project requires?

That there is a role for philosophy in interdisciplinary collaborations is not news. But if philosophy can be so useful in these contexts why don’t we see more philosophers contributing to this sort of work? We believe that the answer lies in the way in which philosophy contributes to this sort of work. Philosophical contributions need to be customized (or ‘localized’) for the particular needs of specific collaborations. This is neither a straightforward nor an easy task. In this presentation we share our developing understanding of this process of localization.

The Toolbox Dialogue Initiative has been developing both tools to support the sort of philosophical midwifery mentioned above and insights into how best to deploy generic philosophical skills in support of the kind of ‘local’ philosophical work we’ve just described. The Toolbox dialogue method (see O’Rourke et al. 2014) engages collaborators in unpacking their ‘philosophical’ commitments (what matters to them, how they do their work etc.). This raises the question: how do you get folks who live rather than articulate their philosophical commitments to actually talk about them?

In this presentation we outline the general nature of prompt development, its philosophical dimensions and provide examples of particular prompts and their impacts drawn from recent Toolbox dialogues involving researchers working on cross disciplinary convergent science projects. In particular we will focus on participant reactions to the prompt, “A project can be successful even if no project member understands all of its parts,” examining how scientists unpack their understanding in the pursuit of collaboration (or integration).

In sum, what makes philosophy particularly critical for cross-disciplinary, collaborative science is the ubiquitous nature of ‘local’ philosophical challenges in collaborative work. Philosophers can help to address those challenges but it requires thinking hard about how to put philosophical skills to work in a ‘local’ way.