Can fiction and veritism go hand in hand?
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The epistemology of models has to face a conundrum: models are often described as highly idealised, and yet they are considered to be vehicles for scientific explanations. Truth-oriented—veritist—conceptions of explanation seem thereby undermined by this contradiction. In this article, I will show how this apparent paradox can be avoided by appealing to the notion of fiction. If fictionalism is often thought to lead to various flavours of instrumentalism, thereby weakening the veritist hopes, the fiction view of models offers a framework much richer than it seems at first sight. To do so, I will call upon the concepts of modality, counterfactual structure and credible worlds. In the end, veritism of explanation and fiction can indeed go hand in hand, but the scope of explanations we can hope to draw from models must be more precisely delineated.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Bokulich, A., 2012. Distinguishing explanatory from nonexplanatory fictions. Philosophy of Science [Online], 79(5), pp.725–737. https://doi.org/10.1086/667991.
Bokulich, A., 2016. Fiction as a vehicle for truth: Moving beyond the ontic conception. The Monist [Online], 99(3), pp.260–279. https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onw004.
Bokulich, A., 2018. Representing and explaining: The eikonic conception of scientific explanation. Philosophy of Science [Online], 85(5), pp.793–805. https://doi.org/10.1086/699693.
Brandelet, A., 2021. Induction et loi naturelle chez Mill. Le Philosophoire [Online], 55(1), pp.205–224. https://doi.org/10.3917/phoir.055.0205.
Chakravartty, A., 2001. The semantic or model-theoretic view of theories and scientific realism. Synthese [Online], 127(3), pp.325–345. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1010359521312.
Craver, C.F., 2019. Idealization and the ontic conception: a reply to bokulich. The Monist [Online], 102(4), pp.525–530. https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onz023.
Craver, C.F., 2007. Explaining the Brain. Oxford University Press, USA, p.272.
Craver, C.F., 2013. The ontic account of scientific explanation. Explanation in the special sciences [Online]. Springer Netherlands, pp.27–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7563-3_2.
Elgin, C.Z., 2017. True Enough. MIT Press Ltd. 352pp.
Frigg, R., 2009. Models and fiction. Synthese [Online], 172(2), pp.251–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9505-0.
Frigg, R. and Nguyen, J., 2016. The fiction view of models reloaded. The Monist [Online], 99(3), pp.225–242. https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onw002.
Frigg, R. and Nguyen, J., 2020. Modelling Nature: An Opinionated Introduction to Scientific Representation. Springer International Publishing. 260pp.
Hacking, I., 1983. Representing and Intervening [Online]. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511814563.
Lawler, I., 2019. Scientific understanding and felicitous legitimate falsehoods. Synthese [Online], 198(7), pp.6859–6887. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02495-0.
Mill, J.S., 1843 / 2011. A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive [Online]. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139149839.
Nawar, T., 2019. Veritism refuted? Understanding, idealization, and the facts. Synthese [Online], 198(5), pp.4295–4313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02342-2.
Pincock, C., 2021. A defense of truth as a necessary condition on scientific explanation. Erkenntnis [Online]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-020-00371-9.
Potochnik, A., 2017. Idealization and the Aims of Science. University of Chicago Press. 288pp.
Sugden, R., 2000. Credible worlds: the status of theoretical models in economics. Journal of Economic Methodology [Online], 7(1), pp.1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/135017800362220.
Sugden, R., 2013. How fictional accounts can explain. Journal of Economic Methodology [Online], 20(3), pp.237–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178x.2013.828872.
Sullivan, E. and Khalifa, K., 2019. Idealizations and understanding: Much ado about nothing? Australasian Journal of Philosophy [Online], 97(4), pp.673–689. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2018.1564337.
Toon, A., 2012. Models as Make-Believe. Palgrave Macmillan. 148pp.
Vaihinger, H., 1911. The Philosophy of ’as If ’. 2009th ed. Martino Fine Books. 420pp.
Verreault-Julien, P., 2019. How could models possibly provide how-possibly explanations? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A [Online], 73, pp.22–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2018.06.008.
Walton, K., 1978. Fearing fictions. The Journal of Philosophy [Online], 75(1), pp.5–27. https://doi.org/10.2307/2025831.
Walton, K., 1990. Mimesis as make-believe : on the foundations of the representational arts. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Winsberg, E., 2006. Models of success versus the success of models: Reliability without truth. Synthese [Online], 152(1), pp.1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-004-5404-6.
Wright, C., 2015. The ontic conception of scientific explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A [Online], 54, pp.20–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.06.001