David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Biology and Philosophy 23 (3):383-402 (2008)
Computer simulation has become important in ecological modeling, but there have been few assessments on how complex simulation models differ from more traditional analytic models. In Part I of this paper, I review the challenges faced in complex ecological modeling and how models have been used to gain theoretical purchase for understanding natural systems. I compare the use of traditional analytic simulation models and point how that the two methods require different kinds of practical engagement. I examine a case study of three models from the insect resistance literature in transgenic crops to illustrate and explore differences in analytic and computer simulation models. I argue that analyzing simulation models has been often inappropriately managed with expectations derived from handling analytic models. In Part II, I look at simulation as a hermeneutic practice. I argue that simulation models are a practice or techné. I the explore five aspects of philosophical hermeneutics that may be useful in complex ecological simulation: (1) an openness to multiple perspectives allowing multiple levels of scientific pluralism, (2) the hermeneutic circle, a back and forth in active communication among both modelers and ecologists; (3) the recognition of human factors and the nature of human practices as such, including recognizing the role of judgments and choices in the modeling enterprise; (4) the importance of play in modeling; (5) the non-closed nature of hermeneutic engagement, continued dialogue, and recognizing the situatedness, incompleteness, and tentative nature of simulation models.
|Keywords||Philosophy Evolutionary Biology Philosophy of Biology|
|Categories||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
Nancy Cartwright (1999). The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge University Press.
Peter Godfrey-Smith (2006). The Strategy of Model-Based Science. Biology and Philosophy 21 (5):725-740.
Paul Humphreys (2004). Extending Ourselves Computational Science, Empiricism, and Scientific Method. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
Michael Weisberg (2007). Who is a Modeler? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 58 (2):207 - 233.
Jay Odenbaugh (2006). The Strategy of “the Strategy of Model Building in Population Biology”. Biology and Philosophy 21 (5):607-621.
Citations of this work BETA
Miles MacLeod & Nancy J. Nersessian (2013). Building Simulations From the Ground Up: Modeling and Theory in Systems Biology. Philosophy of Science 80 (4):533-556.
Steven L. Peck (2009). Whose Boundary? An Individual Species Perspectival Approach to Borders. Biological Theory 4 (3):274-279.
Similar books and articles
Johannes Lenhard (2006). Surprised by a Nanowire: Simulation, Control, and Understanding. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):605-616.
Johannes Lenhard (2007). Computer Simulation: The Cooperation Between Experimenting and Modeling. Philosophy of Science 74 (2):176-194.
Margaret Morrison (2009). Models, Measurement and Computer Simulation: The Changing Face of Experimentation. Philosophical Studies 143 (1):33 - 57.
Eric Winsberg (2001). Simulations, Models, and Theories: Complex Physical Systems and Their Representations. Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S442-.
Ronald N. Giere (2009). Is Computer Simulation Changing the Face of Experimentation? Philosophical Studies 143 (1):59 - 62.
Wendy S. Parker (2008). Computer Simulation Through an Error-Statistical Lens. Synthese 163 (3):371 - 384.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #128,783 of 1,907,442 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #197,471 of 1,907,442 )
How can I increase my downloads?