Ingvar Johansson wrote:
>> So you have actually answered the question: if there are situations in
>> which it does make sense to say that a sentence about reality is a model
>> of it, then it is not *essentially* wrong to say that. It might have
>> been wrong under the interpretation Barry assigned to it (somewhat
>> mistakenly wrt. my intentions).
>>
>
> I agree; in my opinion, it is not essentially wrong to say that a
> sentence about reality is a model of it. But it is equally important to
> add that such talk is often either redundant or misused. It can be
> redundant in the same way as 'it is true that snow is white' can be
> redundant in relation to 'snow is white'). Since Barry has hunted down
> many misuses of model talk in informatics, I will take another example
> that relates to my view that one has to be clear about whether one uses
> a certain model in a realistic, fictional, or assumptive way. It is
> extremely hard to make predictions about how the economy will develop.
> Nonetheless, economists often in newspapers and television simply tell
> people how it will develop (realistic talk), but later when they are
> held responsible for their false predictions they say that people have
> to realize that they were only talking about a model (fictional talk);
> in their seminar rooms they probably use assumptive talk. I regard such
> public switches between realistic and fictional model talk as a serious
> misuse of the term 'scientific model'. (01)
:) (02)
vQ (03)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (04)
|