Philosophers of science are increasingly arguing for and addressing the need to do work that is socially and scientifically engaged. However, we currently lack well-developed frameworks for thinking about how we should engage other expert communities and what the epistemic benefits are of doing so. In this paper, I draw on Collins and Evans' concept of ‘interactional expertise’ – the ability to speak the language of a discipline in the absence of an ability to practice – to consider the epistemic benefits that can arise when philosophers engage scientific communities. As Collins and Evans argue, becoming an interactional expert requires that one ‘hang out’ with members of the relevant expert community in order to learn crucial tacit knowledge needed to speak the language. Building on this work, I argue that acquiring interactional expertise not only leads to linguistic fluency, but it also confers several ‘socio-epistemic’ benefits such as the opportunity to cultivate trust with scientific communities. These benefits can improve philosophical work and facilitate the broader uptake of philosophers' ideas, enabling philosophers to meet a variety of epistemic goals. As a result, having at least some philosophers of science acquire interactional expertise via engagement will likely enhance the diversity of epistemic capacities for philosophy of science as a whole. For some philosophers of science, moreover, the socio-epistemic benefits identified here may be more important than the ability to speak the language of a discipline, suggesting the need for a broader analysis of interactional expertise, which this paper also advances.

科学哲学家越来越多地主张和解决进行社会和科学工作的需求。但是，我们目前缺乏完善的框架来考虑如何与其他专家社区互动以及这样做的认知益处。在本文中，我借鉴了Collins和Evans的“互动专业知识”的概念，即在缺乏实践能力的情况下说一门学科语言的能力，考虑了当哲学家与科学界互动时可能产生的认知益处。正如Collins和Evans所说，要成为一名互动专家，需要与相关专家团体的成员“闲逛”，以学习说这种语言所需的重要隐性知识。以这项工作为基础，我认为，获得互动专业知识不仅可以提高语言流利程度，而且还可以带来一些“社会流行”的好处，例如与科学界建立信任的机会。这些好处可以改善哲学工作并促进哲学家思想的广泛采用，使哲学家能够实现各种认识目标。结果，至少有一些科学哲学家可以通过参与获得互动专业知识，这可能会增强整个科学哲学的认识能力的多样性。而且，对于某些科学哲学家来说，此处确定的社会流行病益处可能比说一门学科语言的能力更为重要，这表明有必要对互动专业知识进行更广泛的分析，而本文也将对此进行改进。