The Modal Basis of Scientific Modelling

Tuomas Tahko

doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04063-z

The Modal Basis of Scientific Modelling

Tuomas Tahko

Department of Philosophy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The practice of scientific modelling often resorts to hypothetical, false, idealised, targetless, partial, generalised, and other types of modelling that appear to have at least partially non-actual targets. In this paper, I will argue that we can avoid a commitment to non-actual targets by sketching a framework where models are understood as having networks of possibilities as their targets. This raises a further question: what are the truthmakers for the modal claims that we can derive from models? I propose that we can find truthmakers for the modal claims derived from models in actuality, even in the case of supposedly non-actual targets. I then put this framework to use by examining a case study concerning the modelling of superheavy elements.

Original language	English
Article number	75
Pages (from-to)	1-16
Number of pages	16
Journal	Synthese
Volume	201
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04063-z
Publication status	Published - 16 Feb 2023

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
I would like to thank Francesca Bellazzi, Toby Friend, and Samuel Kimpton-Nye, audiences at the Modal Modelling in Science Workshop, and participants at a WIP seminar in Bristol for helpful discussion and comments on earlier drafts. Thanks also to two reviewers for Synthese as well the editors of the Modal Modeling Special Issue for their many detailed comments. The research for this paper has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, grant agreement no 771509, The Metaphysical Unity of Science (‘MetaScience’) Consolidator grant.

Funding Information:
I would like to thank Francesca Bellazzi, Toby Friend, and Samuel Kimpton-Nye, audiences at the Modal Modelling in Science Workshop, and participants at a WIP seminar in Bristol for helpful discussion and comments on earlier drafts. Thanks also to two reviewers for Synthese as well the editors of the Modal Modeling Special Issue for their many detailed comments. The research for this paper has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, grant agreement no 771509, The Metaphysical Unity of Science (‘MetaScience’) Consolidator grant.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).

Research Groups and Themes

Centre for Science and Philosophy

Keywords

Philosophy
Metaphysics
Models
Modelling
transuranic elements
Truthmaking

Access to Document

10.1007/s11229-023-04063-zLicence: CC BY

Handle.net

Persistent link

MetaScience: The Metaphysical Unity of Science
Tahko, T. (Principal Investigator), Seifert, V. A. (Researcher), Friend, T. T. (Researcher), Kimpton-Nye, S. (Researcher), Bellazzi, F. (Student), Franklin, A. (Other ) & Morgan, W. H. (Researcher)
1/09/18 → 31/08/23
Project: Research

Cite this

@article{4ce3a4ea5693468c9a762c3335cad835,

title = "The Modal Basis of Scientific Modelling",

abstract = "The practice of scientific modelling often resorts to hypothetical, false, idealised, targetless, partial, generalised, and other types of modelling that appear to have at least partially non-actual targets. In this paper, I will argue that we can avoid a commitment to non-actual targets by sketching a framework where models are understood as having networks of possibilities as their targets. This raises a further question: what are the truthmakers for the modal claims that we can derive from models? I propose that we can find truthmakers for the modal claims derived from models in actuality, even in the case of supposedly non-actual targets. I then put this framework to use by examining a case study concerning the modelling of superheavy elements.",

keywords = "Philosophy, Metaphysics, Models, Modelling, transuranic elements, Truthmaking",

author = "Tuomas Tahko",

note = "Funding Information: I would like to thank Francesca Bellazzi, Toby Friend, and Samuel Kimpton-Nye, audiences at the Modal Modelling in Science Workshop, and participants at a WIP seminar in Bristol for helpful discussion and comments on earlier drafts. Thanks also to two reviewers for Synthese as well the editors of the Modal Modeling Special Issue for their many detailed comments. The research for this paper has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union{\textquoteright}s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, grant agreement no 771509, The Metaphysical Unity of Science ({\textquoteleft}MetaScience{\textquoteright}) Consolidator grant. Funding Information: I would like to thank Francesca Bellazzi, Toby Friend, and Samuel Kimpton-Nye, audiences at the Modal Modelling in Science Workshop, and participants at a WIP seminar in Bristol for helpful discussion and comments on earlier drafts. Thanks also to two reviewers for Synthese as well the editors of the Modal Modeling Special Issue for their many detailed comments. The research for this paper has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union{\textquoteright}s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, grant agreement no 771509, The Metaphysical Unity of Science ({\textquoteleft}MetaScience{\textquoteright}) Consolidator grant. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023, The Author(s).",

year = "2023",

month = feb,

day = "16",

doi = "10.1007/s11229-023-04063-z",

language = "English",

volume = "201",

pages = "1--16",

journal = "Synthese",

issn = "0039-7857",

publisher = "Springer Verlag",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Modal Basis of Scientific Modelling

AU - Tahko, Tuomas

N1 - Funding Information: I would like to thank Francesca Bellazzi, Toby Friend, and Samuel Kimpton-Nye, audiences at the Modal Modelling in Science Workshop, and participants at a WIP seminar in Bristol for helpful discussion and comments on earlier drafts. Thanks also to two reviewers for Synthese as well the editors of the Modal Modeling Special Issue for their many detailed comments. The research for this paper has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, grant agreement no 771509, The Metaphysical Unity of Science (‘MetaScience’) Consolidator grant. Funding Information: I would like to thank Francesca Bellazzi, Toby Friend, and Samuel Kimpton-Nye, audiences at the Modal Modelling in Science Workshop, and participants at a WIP seminar in Bristol for helpful discussion and comments on earlier drafts. Thanks also to two reviewers for Synthese as well the editors of the Modal Modeling Special Issue for their many detailed comments. The research for this paper has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, grant agreement no 771509, The Metaphysical Unity of Science (‘MetaScience’) Consolidator grant. Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s).

PY - 2023/2/16

Y1 - 2023/2/16

N2 - The practice of scientific modelling often resorts to hypothetical, false, idealised, targetless, partial, generalised, and other types of modelling that appear to have at least partially non-actual targets. In this paper, I will argue that we can avoid a commitment to non-actual targets by sketching a framework where models are understood as having networks of possibilities as their targets. This raises a further question: what are the truthmakers for the modal claims that we can derive from models? I propose that we can find truthmakers for the modal claims derived from models in actuality, even in the case of supposedly non-actual targets. I then put this framework to use by examining a case study concerning the modelling of superheavy elements.

AB - The practice of scientific modelling often resorts to hypothetical, false, idealised, targetless, partial, generalised, and other types of modelling that appear to have at least partially non-actual targets. In this paper, I will argue that we can avoid a commitment to non-actual targets by sketching a framework where models are understood as having networks of possibilities as their targets. This raises a further question: what are the truthmakers for the modal claims that we can derive from models? I propose that we can find truthmakers for the modal claims derived from models in actuality, even in the case of supposedly non-actual targets. I then put this framework to use by examining a case study concerning the modelling of superheavy elements.

KW - Philosophy

KW - Metaphysics

KW - Models

KW - Modelling

KW - transuranic elements

KW - Truthmaking

U2 - 10.1007/s11229-023-04063-z

DO - 10.1007/s11229-023-04063-z

M3 - Article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 36820131

SN - 0039-7857

VL - 201

SP - 1

EP - 16

JO - Synthese

JF - Synthese

IS - 3

M1 - 75

ER -

The Modal Basis of Scientific Modelling

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Research Groups and Themes

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Projects

MetaScience: The Metaphysical Unity of Science

Cite this