Selective Ignorance and Multiple Scales in Biology: Deciding on Criteria for Model Utility [Book Review]

Biological Theory 8 (1):74-79 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Much of the scientific process involves “selective ignorance”: we include certain aspects of the systems we are considering and ignore others. This is inherent in the models that we utilize as proxies for biological systems. Our goal usually is to isolate components of these systems and consider them at only certain temporal and spatial scales. The scales and questions induce different metrics for what might be considered a “good” model. The study of mathematical and computational models is replete with differing views of the terms verification, validation, corroboration, and so on. I have often argued that criteria for determination of model utility should be established prior to model construction, but this is rarely done in the application of models in biology. The question I address is whether it is feasible to develop a general approach to model evaluation, that includes all the forms of models typically applied in biology—animal and cell/tissue culture ones as well as mathematical and computational ones

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Is there more to “model” than “muddle”?Matthias Scheutz - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1076-1077.
Ladder, tree, web.Kalevi Kull - 2003 - Sign Systems Studies 31 (2):589-602.
Systems biology and the integration of mechanistic explanation and mathematical explanation.Ingo Brigandt - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (4):477-492.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-21

Downloads
22 (#690,757)

6 months
3 (#992,474)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations