University of Pittsburgh Press (2009)
AbstractScientists have used models for hundreds of years as a means of describing phenomena and as a basis for further analogy. In _Scientific Models in Philosophy of Science, _Daniela Bailer-Jones assembles an original and comprehensive philosophical analysis of how models have been used and interpreted in both historical and contemporary contexts. Bailer-Jones delineates the many forms models can take, and how they are put to use. She examines early mechanical models employed by nineteenth-century physicists such as Kelvin and Maxwell, describes their roots in the mathematical principles of Newton and others, and compares them to contemporary mechanistic approaches. Bailer-Jones then views the use of analogy in the late nineteenth century as a means of understanding models and to link different branches of science. She reveals how analogies can also be models themselves, or can help to create them. The first half of the twentieth century saw little mention of models in the literature of logical empiricism. Focusing primarily on theory, logical empiricists believed that models were of temporary importance, flawed, and awaiting correction. The later contesting of logical empiricism, particularly the hypothetico-deductive account of theories, by philosophers such as Mary Hesse, sparked a renewed interest in the importance of models during the 1950s that continues to this day. Bailer-Jones analyzes subsequent propositions of: models as metaphors; Kuhn's concept of a paradigm; the Semantic View of theories; and the case study approaches of Cartwright and Morrison, among others. She then engages current debates on topics such as phenomena versus data, the distinctions between models and theories, the concepts of representation and realism, and the discerning of falsities in models
Similar books and articles
Scientists' Thoughts on Scientific Models.Daniela M. Bailer-Jones - 2002 - Perspectives on Science 10 (3):275-301.
Tracing the Development of Models in the Philosophy of Science.Daniela M. Bailer-Jones - 1999 - In L. Magnani, N. J. Nersessian & P. Thagard (eds.), Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. Kluwer/Plenum. pp. 23--40.
How to Do Science with Models: A Philosophical Primer.Axel Gelfert - 2016 - Springer.
Scientific Models in Philosophy of Science.Tarja Knuuttila - 2010 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (4):437-440.
Daniela Bailer-Jones. Scientific Models in Philosophy of Science. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2009. Pp. 248. $45.95. [REVIEW]S. G. Sterrett - 2013 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 3 (2):334-337.
Computational Models in the Philosophy of Science.Paul Thagard - 1986 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:329 - 335.
ONCE UPON A TIME ... A Fictionalist Account of Scientific Models & Scientific Representation.Jan Arreman - 2011 - Dissertation, Antwerp University
Models and Inferences in Science.Emiliano Ippoliti, Fabio Sterpetti & Thomas Nickles (eds.) - 2016 - Cham: Springer.
Models as Make-Believe: Imagination, Fiction and Scientific Representation.Adam Toon - 2012 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
When Scientific Models Represent.Daniela M. Bailer-Jones - 2003 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 17 (1):59 – 74.
Towards Democratic Models of Science: Exploring the Case of Scientific Pluralism.Jeroen Van Bouwel - 2015 - Perspectives on Science 23 (2):149-172.
Models, Pictures, and Unified Accounts of Representation: Lessons From Aesthetics for Philosophy of Science.Stephen M. Downes - 2009 - Perspectives on Science 17 (4):417-428.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Robustness, Reliability, and Overdetermination (1981).William C. Wimsatt - 2012 - In Characterizing the Robustness of Science. pp. 61-78.
Understanding (with) Toy Models.Alexander Reutlinger, Dominik Hangleiter & Stephan Hartmann - 2018 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 69 (4):1069-1099.
Understanding Scientific Progress: The Noetic Account.Finnur Dellsén - 2021 - Synthese 199 (3-4):11249-11278.
Understanding (With) Toy Models.Alexander Reutlinger, Dominik Hangleiter & Stephan Hartmann - 2016 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axx005.
Hawking Radiation and Analogue Experiments: A Bayesian Analysis.Radin Dardashti, Stephan Hartmann, Karim Thébault & Eric Winsberg - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 67:1-11.
References found in this work
No references found.