Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding Simulation Validation—The Hermeneutic Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Computer Simulation Validation

Part of the book series: Simulation Foundations, Methods and Applications ((SFMA))

  • 2635 Accesses

Abstract

The thesis of a hermeneutic perspective on validation in simulation has existed ever since Kleindorfer et al. (Manag Sci 44:1087–1099, 1998) published their overview of various positions in the philosophy of science . This chapter introduces the distinction between a hermeneutics in validation and a hermeneutics of validation . I argue that the hermeneutic perspective according to Kleindorfer, O’Neill and Ganeshan, which qualifies as a hermeneutics in validation perspective, is rather fruitless. Instead, a hermeneutics of simulation validation is proposed on the basis of Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics. The goal of the hermeneutics of validation is to understand simulation validation. The challenge is to set up a hermeneutic situation in the first place. Hermeneutic aims to demonstrate how simulation validation is historically situated, revealing the hidden prejudice (prejudgement) in validating, and distinguishing between legitimate prejudice and prejudice that has to be overcome. Understanding simulation validation is a dialogic, practical, situated activity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The presentation of the hermeneutic perspective on simulation validation by Kleindorfer et al. (1998, pp. 1096–1098 and one row in Table 9.1, p. 1090) amounts to no more than two pages in total. Gadamer’s hermeneutics as put forward in Truth and Method (Gadamer 2013 [original 1960]) serves as a major reference, although it is the reading of Gadamer’s hermeneutics by Bernstein (1983) which the authors actually adopt. This becomes explicit on p. 1098, where they refer to ‘Bernstein’s hermeneutics’. They introduce Bernstein as a philosopher who presents Gadamer’s hermeneutics as a philosophical fulcrum for transcending the polarity of the foundationalist versus anti-foundationalist debate. The authors apply Bernstein’s hermeneutics to validation in simulation, taking two quotations from Barlas and Carpenter (1990) and Carson (1989) to support their arguments.

  2. 2.

    Several formulations of the term ‘hermeneutic circle’ are known. The classic notion refers to the back-and-forth movement of thought from the whole to a part of the object of investigation and back to the whole again, each new understanding of the latter modifying the understanding of the former, and vice versa. The objective is to recover the meaning of the object of the investigation.

References

  • Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, H. (1969). Crisis of the republic. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barlas, Y., & Carpenter, S. (1990). Philosophical roots of model validation. Two paradigms. System Dynamics Review, 6, 148–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, R. J. (1983). Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermeneutics, and praxis. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, S., & Morrison, R. J. (2000). Validation of longitudinal dynamic microsimulation models. Experience with CORSIM and DYNACAN. In: L. Mitton, H. Sutherland, & M. J. Weeks (Eds.), Microsimulation modelling for policy analysis. Challenges and innovations (pp. 200–225). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, J. S. (1989). Verification and validation. A consultant’s perspective. In: E. A. MacNair, K. J. Musselman, & P. Heidelberger (Eds.), Proceedings 1989 Winter Simulation Conference (pp. 552–557).

    Google Scholar 

  • Crease, R. P. (1997). Hermeneutics and the natural science: Introduction. Man and World, 30, 259–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Agostino, F. (2014). Hermeneutics, epistemology, and science. In: J. Malpras & H. -H. Gander (Eds.), The Routledge companion to hermeneutics (pp. 417–428). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doublet, D. R. (2003). Der Hermeneutische Zirkel: Über Grenzen für die Interpretation und Bedingungen für das Verstehen. In S. U. Larsen & E. Zimmermann (Eds.), Theorien und Methoden in den Sozialwissenschaften (pp. 61–75). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Eger, M. (1997). Achievement of the hermeneutic-phenomenological approach to natural science. A comparison with constructivist sociology. Man and World, 30, 343–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feher, M., Kiss, O., & Ropolyi, L. (Eds.). (1999). Hermeneutics and science. Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, A. H., & Cannon, H. M. (2003). A hermeneutical approach to external validation of simulation models. Simulation & Gaming, 34, 186–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against method. Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London: New Left Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S. C., Collins, W., Cox, P., Driouech, F., Emori, S., Eyring, V., Forest, C., Gleckler, P., Guilyardi, E., Jakob, C., Kattsov, V., Reason, C., & Rummukainen, M. (2013). Evaluation of climate models. In: Stocker, T. F., D. Qin, G. -K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex, & P. M. Midgley (Eds.), Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, H. -G. (1990). Reply to my critics. In: D. Ormiston & A. Schrift (Eds.), The hermeneutic tradition (pp. 273–297). Albany, NY: Suny Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, H. -G. (2013). Truth and method. Rev. 2nd edn. Trans. by J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall. London: Bloomsbury. [1st German edition: 1960. Wahrheit und Methode. Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik. Tübingen: Mohr].

    Google Scholar 

  • Guillemot, H. (2010). Connections between simulations and observation in climate computer modeling. Scientist’s practices and ‘‘bottom-up epistemology’’ lessons. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 41, 242–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Vol. 1. Reason and the rationalization of society. Trans. and introduced by T. McCarthy. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms. Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Trans. and introduced by W. Rehg. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heelan, P. A. (1998). The scope of hermeneutics in natural science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 29, 273–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, P. (2004). Extending ourselves. Computational science, empiricism, and scientific method. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, P. (2009). The philosophical novelty of computer simulation methods. Synthese, 169, 615–626.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kisiel, T. (1997). A hermeneutics of the natural sciences? The debate updated. Man and World, 30, 329–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleindorfer, G. B., & Geneshan, R. (1993). The philosophy of science and validation in simulation. In: Proceedings of the 25th Conference on Winter Simulation (WSC 1993), New York, NY, USA (pp. 50–57).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleindorfer, G. B., O’Neill, L., & Ganeshan, R. (1998). Validation in simulation: Various positions in the philosophy of science. Management Science, 44, 1087–1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malpas, J., & Gander, H.-H. (Eds.). (2014). The Routledge companion to hermeneutics. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, G. (1987). Why is there no hermeneutics of the natural sciences? Some preliminary theses. Science in Context, 1, 5–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naylor, T. H., & Finger, J. M. (1967). Verification of computer simulation models. Management Science, 14, B92–B101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newton, P. E., & S. D. Shaw (2014). Validity in educational and psychological assessment. Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oreskes, N., Shrader-Frechette, K., & Belitz, K. (1994). Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences. Science, 263, 641–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poscher, R. (2014). Hermeneutics, jurisprudence and law. In J. Malpas & H.-H. Gander (Eds.), The Routledge companion to hermeneutics (pp. 451–465). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reutlinger, A., Hagleiter, D., & Hartmann, S. (2018). Understanding (with) toy models. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 69, 1069–1099.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramberg, B., & Gjesdal, K. (2005). Hermeneutics. In: E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (2005 ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/hermeneutics/#Pragmatism.

  • Saam, N. J. (2017). Understanding social science simulations. Distinguishing two categories of simulations. In: M. Resch, A. Kaminski, & P. Gehring (Eds.), The science and art of simulation I. Exploring - Understanding - Knowing (pp. 67–84). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saam, N. J., & Schmidl, A. (2018). ‘A Distinct Element of Play.’ Scientific computer simulation as playful investigating. In: A. Friedrich, P. Gehring, C. Hubig, A. Kaminski, & A. Nordmann (Eds.), Arbeit und Spiel. Jahrbuch Technikphilosophie 2018 (pp. 99–118). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger, S. (1979). Terminology for model credibility. Simulation, 32, 103–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackley, S. (2001). Epistemic lifestyles in climate change modeling. In C. A. Miller & P. N. Edwards (Eds.), Changing the atmosphere: Expert knowledge and environmental governance (pp. 107–133). Cambridge, MA, USA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, N. H. (2014). Hermeneutics and critical theory. In: J. Malpas & H. -H. Gander (Eds.), The Routledge companion to hermeneutics (pp. 600–611). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmann, M. (2007). Auf dem Weg zu einer modernen Epistemologie. In G. Figal (Ed.), Hans-Georg Gadamer: Wahrheit und Methode (pp. 87–103). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Claus Beisbart for helpful discussions concerning this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Soziologie, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany

    Nicole J. Saam

Authors
  1. Nicole J. Saam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicole J. Saam .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    Claus Beisbart

  2. Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany

    Nicole J. Saam

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Saam, N.J. (2019). Understanding Simulation Validation—The Hermeneutic Perspective. In: Beisbart, C., Saam, N. (eds) Computer Simulation Validation. Simulation Foundations, Methods and Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70766-2_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70766-2_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70765-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70766-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation