Can simulations be explanatory an why do they seem not to be?


Computer simulations are usually considered to be non-explanatory because, when a simulation reveals that a property is instantiated in a system, it does not enable the exact identification of what it is that brings this property out (relevance requirement). Conversely, analytical deductions are widely considered to yield explanations and understanding. In this paper, I emphasize that explanations should satisfy the relevance requirement and argue that the more they do so, the more they have explanatory value. Finally, I show that this emphasis on relevance has the unexpected consequence that simulations can sometimes be explanatory.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,480

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.


Added to PP

601 (#15,115)

6 months
1 (#417,474)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references