Abstract
According to one influential view, model-building in science is primarily a matter of simplifying theoretical descriptions of real-world target systems using abstraction and idealization. This view, however, does not adequately capture all types of models. Many contemporary models in the natural and social sciences – from physics to biology to economics – stand in a more tenuous relationship with real-world target systems and have a decidedly stipulative element, in that they create, by fiat, ‘model worlds’ that operate according to some set of specified rules. While such models may be motivated by an interest in actual target phenomena, their validity is not – at least not primarily – to be judged by whether they constitute an empirically adequate representation of any particular empirical system. The present paper compares and contrasts three such types of models: minimal models, toy models, and exploratory models. All three share some characteristics and thus overlap in interesting ways, yet they also exhibit significant differences. It is argued that, in all three cases, modal considerations have an important role to play: by exploring the modal structure of theories and phenomena – that is, by probing possibilities in various ways – such models deepen our understanding and help us gain knowledge not only about what there is in the world, but also about what there could be.
Keywords
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
See (Reutlinger, Hangleiter, and Hartmann 2018, pp. 1075–1077).
- 3.
For a discussion of this example as an illustration of one of several key functions of exploratory modelling, see (Gelfert 2016, pp. 85–86).
- 4.
For a full discussion of this example from the perspective of exploratory modelling, see (Gelfert 2018).
References
Bailer-Jones D (2002) Scientists’ thoughts on scientific models. Perspect Sci 10(3):275–301
Batterman R (2002) Asymptotics and the role of minimal models. Br J Philos Sci 53(1):21–38
Batterman R, Rice C (2014) Minimal model explanations. Philos Sci 81(3):349–376
Cartwright N (1983) How the laws of physics lie. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Diéguez A (2015) Scientific understanding and the explanatory use of false models. In: Bertolaso M (ed) The future of scientific practice: ‘bio-techno-logos’. Pickering & Chatto, London, pp 161–178
Dray W (1957) Laws and explanation in history. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Forber P (2010) Confirmation and explaining how possible. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 41(1):32–40
Gelfert A (2016) How to do science with models: a philosophical primer. Springer, Cham
Gelfert A (2018) Models in search of targets: exploratory modelling and the case of Turing patterns. In: Christian A, Hommen D, Retzlaff N, Schurz G (eds) Philosophy of science: between natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 245–271
Goldenfeld N (1992) Lectures on phase transitions and the renormalization group. Addison-Wesley, Boston
Gottschalk-Mazouz N (2012) Toy Modeling: Warum gibt es (immer noch) sehr einfache Modelle in den empirischen Wissenschaften? In: Fischer P, Luckner A, Ramming U (eds) Die Reflexion des Möglichen. LIT-Verlag, Berlin, pp 17–30
Kadanoff LP (1966) Scaling laws for Ising models near Tc. Physics 2(6):263–272
Luczak J (2016) Talk about toy models. Stud. Hist. Philos. Mod. Phys. 57(1):1–7
Massimi M (2018) Perspectival modeling. Philos Sci 85(3):335–359
McMullin E (1985) Galilean idealization. Stud History Philos Sci Part A 16(3):247–273
Mehmet M, Sober E (2002) Cartwright on explanation and idealization. In: Earman J, Glymour C, Mitchell S (eds) Ceteris paribus laws. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 165–174
Morrison M, Morgan M (1999) Models as mediating instruments. In: Morrison M, Morgan M (eds) Models as mediators: perspectives on natural and social science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 10–37
Pipes LA (1953) An operational analysis of traffic dynamics. J Appl Phys 24(3):274–281
Reiss J (2012) The explanation paradox. J Econ Methodol 19(1):43–62
Reutlinger A, Hangleiter D, Hartmann S (2018) Understanding (with) toy models. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 69(4):1069–1099
Reydon T (2012) How-possibly explanations as genuine explanations and helpful heuristics: a comment on Forber. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 43(1):302–310
Rice C (2019) Models don’t decompose that way: a holistic view of idealized models. Br J Philos Sci 70(1):179–208
Roughgarden J, Bergman A, Shafir S, Taylor C (1996) Adaptive computation in ecology and evolution: a guide for future research. In: Belew RK, Mitchell M (eds) Adaptive individuals in evolving populations: models and algorithms. Addison-Wesley, Boston, pp 25–30
Strevens M (2009) Depth: an account of scientific explanation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Sugden R (2000) Credible worlds: the status of theoretical models in economics. J Econ Methodol 7(1):1–31
Turing A (1952) The chemical basis of morphogenesis. Philos Trans Roy Soc Lond (Ser B Biol Sci) 237(641):37–72
Weisberg M (2007) Three kinds of idealization. J Philos 104(12):639–659
Woodward J (2009) Scientific explanation In: Zalta E (ed) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2009 Edition). https://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/archives/spr2009/entries/scientific-explanation/. Accessed 03 Mar 2019
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Gelfert, A. (2019). Probing Possibilities: Toy Models, Minimal Models, and Exploratory Models. In: Nepomuceno-Fernández, Á., Magnani, L., Salguero-Lamillar, F., Barés-Gómez, C., Fontaine, M. (eds) Model-Based Reasoning in Science and Technology. MBR 2018. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, vol 49. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32722-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32722-4_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32721-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32722-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)