Is Epstein really praising modeling, or is he really praising (clear/scientific) thinking, which he seems to identify with modeling. He cites scientific theories (Maxwell's equations, the Lotka-Volterra ecosystem model, Hooke's Law, the Kermack-McKendrick epidemic equations) as successful models. But why call them models rather than theories?
He concludes, for example, as follows. The most important contribution of the modeling enterprise is that it enforces a scientific habit of mind ... One does not base beliefs on authority, but ultimately on evidence. ... Education, in its truest sense, is not about "a saleable skill set." It's about freedom, from inherited prejudice and argument by authority. This is the deepest contribution of the modeling enterprise. It enforces habits of mind essential to freedom.Does this really answer the question "Why model?" Or does it answer the question "Why think?" -- Russ Abbott _____________________________________________ Professor, Computer Science California State University, Los Angeles o Check out my blog at http://russabbott.blogspot.com/ On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Owen Densmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As Robert mentioned, JASSS is out. Here's one likely to be of general > interest: > Why Model? http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/11/4/12.html > > Nick: a reasonable discussion of prediction lies therein. > > -- Owen > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
