Some virtues of modeling with both hands
| Abstract | Webb distinguishes two endeavors she calls animal modeling and animat modeling and advocates for the former. I share her preference and point to additional virtues of modeling actual biological mechanisms (animal modeling). As Webb argues, animat modeling should be regarded as modeling of specific, but madeup, biological mechanisms. I contend that modeling made-up mechanisms in situations in which we have some knowledge of the actual mechanisms involved is modeling with one hand—the good one—tied behind one’s back.1 The hand that is used in animat modeling is constructing and evaluating models by whether they behave in the right way—do they exhibit the particular phenomenon one is trying to understand? The good hand that is disavowed seeks to use evidence about the mechanism employed in real living systems both for inspiration in designing the model and for evaluating the model. Denying oneself use of one’s good hand both limits one’s access to valuable evidence for evaluating a model and denies oneself access to a potent discovery strategy. Webb draws attention to one reason to employ the good hand—if models are to be relevant to biology (and not just characterize hypothetical mechanisms), then the component parts and operations specified in the model must in some way map onto those in actual biological organisms. Especially if one accepts the possibility of multiple realizations, then if one only uses behavior to evaluate the model one may well have described an alternative realization than that found in real organisms. To determine that one has modeled the actual realization, it is necessary to compare the proposed mechanism with the actual mechanism—does it.. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,705 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesRobert L. Ashenhurst (1996). Ontological Aspects of Information Modeling. Minds and Machines 6 (3):287-394.
William Bechtel & Adele A. Abrahamsen (forthcoming). Thinking Dynamically About Biological Mechanisms: Networks of Coupled Oscillators. Foundations of Science.
Edoardo Datteri & Guglielmo Tamburrini (2007). Biorobotic Experiments for the Discovery of Biological Mechanisms. Philosophy of Science 74 (3):409-430.
Thomas Sugar & Michael McBeath (2001). Robotic Modeling of Mobile Ball-Catching as a Tool for Understanding Biological Interceptive Behavior. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1078-1080.
Dennis J. Moberg (2000). Role Models and Moral Exemplars. Business Ethics Quarterly 10 (3):675-696.
Arthur M. Jacobs & Jonathan Grainger (1999). Modeling a Theory Without a Model Theory, or, Computational Modeling “After Feyerabend”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):46-47.
William Bechtel & Adele Abrahamsen (2010). Dynamic Mechanistic Explanation: Computational Modeling of Circadian Rhythms as an Exemplar for Cognitive Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (3):321-333.
James Justus (2006). Loop Analysis and Qualitative Modeling: Limitations and Merits. Biology and Philosophy 21 (5):647-666.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-06-26Total downloads24 ( #51,701 of 549,359 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,418 of 549,359 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
