Appraising Models Nonrepresentationally

Philosophy of Science 80 (5):850-861 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many scientific models lack an established representation relation to actual targets and instead refer to merely possible processes, background conditions, and results. This article shows how such models can be appraised. On the basis of the discussion of how-possibly explanations, five types of learning opportunities are distinguished. For each of these types, an example—from economics, biology, psychology, and sociology—is discussed. Contexts and purposes are identified in which the use of a model offers a genuine opportunity to learn. These learning opportunities offer novel justifications for modeling practices that fall between the cracks of standard representationalist appraisals of models

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,612

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-12

Downloads
97 (#174,830)

6 months
16 (#218,157)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Till Grüne-Yanoff
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

Citations of this work

Understanding (with) Toy Models.Alexander Reutlinger, Dominik Hangleiter & Stephan Hartmann - 2018 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 69 (4):1069-1099.
How could models possibly provide how-possibly explanations?Philippe Verreault-Julien - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 73:1-12.
The natural selection of conservative science.Cailin O'Connor - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 76:24-29.

View all 44 citations / Add more citations