Models and Representation

Frigg, Roman; Nguyen, James

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30526-4_3

Cited by 86 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 180 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…14 For extensive criticisms of the similarity account see (Frigg 2006;Frigg and Nguyen 2017;Suárez 2003).…”

Section: Imputation and Keysmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The turn of the valve: representing with material models

Frigg¹,

Nguyen

2017

Euro Jnl Phil Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many scientific models are representations. Building on Goodman and Elgin's notion of representation-as we analyse what this claim involves by providing a general definition of what makes something a scientific model and formulating a novel account of how models represent. We call the result the DEKI account of representation, which offers a complex kind of representation involving an interplay of denotation, exemplification, keying up of properties, and imputation. Throughout we focus on material models, and we illustrate our claims with the Phillips-Newlyn machine. In the conclusion we suggest that, mutatis mutandis, the DEKI account can be carried over to other kinds of models, notably fictional and mathematical models.

show abstract

“…14 For extensive criticisms of the similarity account see (Frigg 2006;Frigg and Nguyen 2017;Suárez 2003).…”

Section: Imputation and Keysmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We refer the reader to (Frigg and Nguyen 2017) for a detailed critical review of the sizeable literature on scientific representation. We take away from this review the message that none of the current accounts provides a satisfactory answer to our problem.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The turn of the valve: representing with material models

Frigg¹,

Nguyen

2017

Euro Jnl Phil Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From the complexity of economic systems it immediately follows that to perceive, discuss, and understand them we need to reduce their complexity via representations. There are numerous different ways of doing so (Frigg and Nguyen 2017). These different ways are not easily comparable, and relating them is difficult.…”

Section: How the Scientific Community Studies Complex Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Complexity of Economies and Pluralism in Economics

Gräbner

2017

Journal of Contextual Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. AbstractFrom the two premises that (1) economies are complex systems and (2) the accumulation of knowledge about reality is desirable, I derive the conclusion that pluralism with regard to economic research programs is a more viable position to hold than monism. To substantiate this claim an epistemological framework of how scholars study their objects of inquiry and relate their models to reality is discussed.Furthermore, it is argued that given the current institutions of our scientific system, economics self-organizes towards a state of scientific unity. Since such a state is epistemologically inferior to a state of plurality, critical intervention is desirable.

show abstract

“…The question is not whether 1 However, "representation" and "models" are complex issues and in general they should not be equated (for a recent overview on the debate see e.g. Frigg and Nguyen (2017)). There are many non-model-based forms of representation (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the interpretation of Feynman diagrams, or, did the LHC experiments observe H → γγ?

Passon

2019

Euro Jnl Phil Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the received view Feynman diagrams are a bookkeeping device in complex perturbative calculations. Thus, they do not provide a representation or model of the underlying physical process. This view is in apparent tension with scientific practice in high energy physics, which analyses its data in terms of "channels". For example the Higgs discovery was based on the observation of the decay H → γγ -a process which can be easily represented by the corresponding Feynman diagrams. I take issue with this tension and show that on closer analysis the story of the Higgs discovery should be told differently.

show abstract

Models and Representation

Cited by 86 publications

References 180 publications

The turn of the valve: representing with material models

The turn of the valve: representing with material models

The Complexity of Economies and Pluralism in Economics

On the interpretation of Feynman diagrams, or, did the LHC experiments observe H → γγ?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About