Models Don't Decompose That Way: A Holistic View of Idealized Models

43Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Many (if not most) accounts of scientific modelling assume that models can be decomposed into the contributions made by their accurate and inaccurate parts. These accounts then argue that the inaccurate parts of the model can be justified by distorting only what is irrelevant. In this article, I argue that this decompositional strategy requires three assumptions that are not typically met by our best scientific models. In response, I propose an alternative view in which idealized models are characterized as holistically distorted representations that are justified by allowing for the application of various (mathematical) modelling techniques. 1 Introduction 2 The Decompositional Strategy 2.1 Mechanistic modelling and decomposition 2.2 Accounts of explanation that require decomposition 2.3 Accounts of idealization that require decomposition 2.4 Robustness analysis and decomposition 2.5 Scientific realism and decomposition 2.6 Three assumptions of the decompositional strategy 3 Against the Decompositional Strategy 3.1 Many scientific models don't decompose that way 3.2 Many idealizations distort difference-making features 4 An Alternative Approach: The Holistic Distortion View of Idealized Models 5 Conclusion.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rice, C. (2019). Models Don’t Decompose That Way: A Holistic View of Idealized Models. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 70(1), 179–208. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axx045

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free