Models as autonomous agents

Morrison, Margaret

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511660108.004

Cited by 185 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It depends on whether we consider models developed by Aristotelian abstractions, by 'Galilean idealization', or by 'mathematical impoverishment'. This has been emphasized in the literature, in particular by Redhead (1980) and Morrison (1999).…”

Section: (Scientific=logical) the Structural Point Of Viewmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…One important recent work in which the Semantic View is used is da Costa and French (2003). 2 See Redhead (1980), Cartwright (1983Cartwright ( , 1989Cartwright ( , 1999, Ereshefsky (1991), Morrison (1999), Suarez (2003), Thomson-Jones (2006), Frigg (2006), Morrison (2007), and Bueno and Krause (2008). 3 What follows is a conceptual reconstruction of the Semantic View.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Defending the Semantic View: what it takes

Bihan

2011

Euro Jnl Phil Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, a modest version of the Semantic View is motivated as both tenable and potentially fruitful for philosophy of science. An analysis is proposed in which the Semantic View is given as characterized by three main claims. For each of these claims, a distinction is made between stronger and more modest interpretations. It is argued that the criticisms recently leveled against the Semantic View hold only under the stronger interpretations of these claims. However, if one only commits to the modest interpretation for all the claims, then the view obtained, which is called the Modest Semantic View, is tenable and fruitful.

show abstract

Section: (Scientific=logical) the Structural Point Of Viewmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defending the Semantic View: what it takes

Bihan

2011

Euro Jnl Phil Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the past two decades, the so-called modeldebate has illuminated how difficult it is to apply theories to phenomena. Models need to be built that not only include principles of the pertinent theory and initial and boundary conditions (as it was thought earlier) but also nomological ingredients of different origins, experiential regularities, rules of thumb and the like (Morrison 1999). The variegated details of the phenomena typically escape the grip of comprehensive theory which merely addresses the generic features of the situation.…”

Section: Platonism and Aristotelianism As Divergent Approaches To Naturementioning

confidence: 99%

Underdetermination as an epistemological test tube: expounding hidden values of the scientific community

Carrier

2009

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(See ref. (24).) In both cases, models allow for good quantitative predictions despite the intractability of the full theory.…”

Section: Mathematical and Computational Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rigorous results, cross-model justification, and the transfer of empirical warrant: the case of many-body models in physics

Gelfert

2008

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper argues that a successful philosophical analysis of models and simulations must accommodate an account of mathematically rigorous results. Such rigorous results may be thought of as genuinely modelspecific contributions, which can neither be deduced from fundamental theory nor inferred from empirical data. Rigorous results provide new indirect ways of assessing the success of models and simulations and are crucial to understanding the connections between different models. This is most obvious in cases where rigorous results map different models on to one another. Not only does this put constraints on the extent to which performance in specific empirical contexts may be regarded as the main touchstone of success in scientific modelling, it also allows for the transfer of warrant across different models. Mathematically rigorous results can thus come to be seen as not only strengthening the cohesion between scientific strategies of modelling and simulation, but also as offering new ways of indirect confirmation.

show abstract

Models as autonomous agents

Cited by 185 publications

References 0 publications

Defending the Semantic View: what it takes

Defending the Semantic View: what it takes

Underdetermination as an epistemological test tube: expounding hidden values of the scientific community

Rigorous results, cross-model justification, and the transfer of empirical warrant: the case of many-body models in physics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About