David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 169 (3):465 - 482 (2009)
We investigate the relationship between two approaches to modeling physical systems. On the first approach, simplifying assumptions are made about the level of detail we choose to represent in a computational simulation with an eye toward tractability. On the second approach simpler, analogue physical systems are considered that have more or less well-defined connections to systems of interest that are themselves too difficult to probe experimentally. Our interest here is in the connections between the artifacts of modeling that appear in these two approaches. We begin by outlining an important respect in which the two are essentially dissimilar and then propose a method whereby overcoming that dissimilarity by hand results in usefully analogous behavior. We claim that progress can be made if we think of artifacts as clues to the projectible predicates proper to the models themselves. Our degree of control over the connection between interesting analogue physical systems and their targets arises from determining the projectible predicates in the analogue system through a combination of theory and experiment. To obtain a similar degree of control over the connection between large-scale, distributed simulations of complex systems and their targets we must similarly determine the projectible predicates of the simulations themselves. In general theory will be too intractable to be of use, and so we advocate an experimental program for determining these predicates. the object of the natural history which I propose is...to give light to the discovery of causes and supply a suckling philosophy with its first food . Francis Bacon, The Great Instauration.
|Keywords||Computational modeling Analogue modeling Human performance Theory structure|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Nelson Goodman (1983). Fact, Fiction, and Forecast. Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Benjamin C. Jantzen (2015). Projection, Symmetry, and Natural Kinds. Synthese 192 (11):3617-3646.
Similar books and articles
R. G. Swinburne (1969). Projectible predicates. Analysis 30 (1):1 - 11.
Brent Mundy (1989). Elementary Categorial Logic, Predicates of Variable Degree, and Theory of Quantity. Journal of Philosophical Logic 18 (2):115 - 140.
Rohit Parikh (1996). Vague Predicates and Language Games. Theoria 11 (3):97-107.
John Moreland (1976). On Projecting Grue. Philosophy of Science 43 (3):363-377.
John M. Vickers (1967). Characteristics of Projectible Predicates. Journal of Philosophy 64 (9):280-286.
Laurence Foster (1969). Differential and Projectible Predicates. Critica 3 (7/8):101 - 111.
Nathan Stemmer (1979). Projectible Predicates. Synthese 41 (3):375 - 395.
Peter Gärdenfors (1990). Induction, Conceptual Spaces and AI. Philosophy of Science 57 (1):78-95.
John L. Pollock (1972). The Logic of Projectibility. Philosophy of Science 39 (3):302-314.
Rami Israel (2006). Projectibility and Explainability or How to Draw a New Picture of Inductive Practices. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 37 (2):269 - 286.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #133,028 of 1,911,838 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #116,720 of 1,911,838 )
How can I increase my downloads?