Modeling mechanisms

Citation: Stuart Glennan (2005) Modeling mechanisms. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 36.2 (2005): 375-388. (RSS)
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): Modeling mechanisms
Tagged:

Summary

The relationships between models and the mechanisms that cause the phenomena to be modeled. Mechanisms underlie behavior, and can be explained by generalizable laws. In this article, Glennan discusses the difference between state-space and mechanistic models. Unlike state-space models, which are the traditional form of modeling in biological sciences, mechanistic models consist of two parts.

First, a mechanistic model contains a description of the behavior of the mechanism. Secondly, the models describes the mechanism that accounts for the behavior. In other words, "the behavior description tells one what a mechanism is doing, while the mechanical description tells one how the mechanism does it". An description of a watch is only half of an explanation under this model. An appropriate explanation would not only describe the watch (it's behavior), but also the mechanisms that allow that behavior (the function of the watch) to occur, such as the internal gears of the watch. Mechanical models must also specify what part of the mechanism is being tested.

If two models exist to explain the same phenomena, the appropriate explanation can be inferred by direct or indirect inference. Direct inference involves exploring the behavior of the individual parts of a mechanism. An indirect inference approach is to study the behavior of the mechanism under non-standard conditions.

Because mechanistic models contain two parts, Glennan believes even a false model can provide a partial explanation of the phenomena. There are no set models, rather, models must continually undergo processes of reiteration and refinement.