A non representationalist view of model explanation

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 326-332

  Kennedy, Ashley Graham ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Explanation; Models; Representation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859835810     PISSN: 00393681     EISSN: 18792510     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2011.12.029     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Bueno O., French S. How theories represent. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 2011, 62(4):857-894.
2. Bokulich A. How scientific models can explain. Synthese 2011, 180(1):33-45.
3. Chakravartty A. Informational versus functional theories of scientific representation. Synthese 2010, 197-213.
4. da Costa N.C.A., French S. Science and partial truth: A unitary approach to models and scientific reasoning 2003, Oxford University Press.
5. De Villiers J.-P., Hawley J.F., Krolik J.H. Magnetically driven accretion flows in the kerr metric. Astrophysical Journal 2003, 599:1238-1253.
6. French S., Ladyman J. Reinflating the semantic approach. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 1999, 13:103-121.
7. Frigg R. Scientific representation and the semantic view of theories. Theoria 2006, 55:49-65.
8. [removed for blind review] Water maser emission from comets. Astronomical Journal 2000, 119:2465-2471.
9. Giere R. An agent-based conception of models and scientific representation. Synthese 2010, 172:269-281.
10. Hawley, J. (2000). Global magnetohydrodynamical simulations of accretion tori. http://www.astro.virginia.edu/VITA/papers/torus3d/torus3d.html.
11. Knuuttila T. Modelling and representing: An artefactual approach to model-based representation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2011, 42(2):262-271.
12. Lipton P. Inference to the best explanation 1991, Routledge, London.
13. Maki U. Models and truth: The functional decompositional approach. European Philosophy of Science 2007, Springer (2009).
14. McMullin E. Galilean idealization. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 1985, 1:247-273.
15. Morrison M., Morrison M. Fictions, representations, and reality. Fictions in science: Philosophical essays on modeling and idealization 2008, 110-135. Routledge, New York & London. M. Suárez (Ed.).
16. Pincock, C. (2004). Overextending partial structures: Idealization and abstraction. Presented at the PSA meeting, 2004. http://www.philpapers.org/rec/BUEEAA.
17. Redhead M. Models in physics. The British Journal for Philosophy of Science 1980, 1:145-163.
18. Strevens, M. (2007). Why explanations lie: Idealization in explanation. http://www.strevens.org/research/expln/Idealization.pdf.
19. Suárez M. Theories, models, and representations. Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery 1999, 75-83. Kluwer, New York. L. Magnani, N.J. Nersessian, P. Thagard (Eds.).
20. Suárez, M. (2010). An inferential conception of scientific representation. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/991/.
21. van Frassen B. Scientific representations, paradoxes and perspectives 2008, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
22. Weisberg, M. (2007). Three kinds of idealization. http://www.phil.upenn.edu/~weisberg/documents/ThreeKindsOnline.pdf.
23. Wimsatt W.C. False models as means to truer theories. Re-engineering philosophy for limited beings: Piecewise approximations to reality 1985, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
24. Woodward J. Making things happen 2003, Oxford University Press, Oxford.