[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Swarm Modelling] Successful predictions are not enough
From: |
Jason Alexander |
Subject: |
Re: [Swarm Modelling] Successful predictions are not enough |
Date: |
Sun, 16 Feb 2003 20:10:34 +0000 |
Hi Cal
i've been following this discussion of modeling with interest, and i
want to
point out that good predictions are not always enough - ``good''
explanation
is also an important and useful criterion (even if it is hard to
decide what
``good'' means in this context)
This is absolutely right and (to my mind) crucially important. So far
I've been ignoring the fact that explanations are often, though not
always, answers to why-questions and, as such, usually pitched at a
particular level (and with a certain set of terms and concepts in mind)
and any explanation that is to count as an "acceptable" or
"satisfactory" explanation needs to be addressed at the same level. My
favourite example is the (hypothetical) answer to the why-question "Why
did my computer crash?" Now, if the only criterion of a satisfactory
explanation is that it be a causal explanation, then one could answer
the question of why my computer crashed by handing me a complete binary
state description of my computer one minute before it crashed. That,
plus knowledge of how my computer changes state, counts as a complete
causal explanation of the phenomenon. But I'd be really ticked off if
a MSCE responded to my question of why my computer crashed by dropping
a 500-page book of 0s and 1s on my desk. The level of explanation
matters.
Cheers,
Jason
--
Dr. J. McKenzie Alexander
Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE