Fiendishly Difficult Questions: Possible Limits and Aesthetic Pleasures of Simulation

Abstract

Simulations facilitate the construction of increasingly complex theories, which, in turn, suffer three attendant curses. By definition, complex theories have many variables, decreasing the chances that all of them will be clear and measurable. This makes complex theories difficult to test, decreasing the chances they will be adequately tested, and difficult to understand, and decreasing the chances of attracting or sustaining an audience. However, constructing simulations that embody complex theories provides an opportunity for new perspectives and insights, and an occasion to renew respect for the complexities of the phenomena that they simulate. These are aesthetic benefits concordant with the definition of science as art with numbers.

Keywords

aesthetic assumptions complex theories complexity conditions insights limits parameters research validation variables simulation test theory understanding

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Einhorn, H. ( 1972). Alchemy in the behavioral sciences. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 367-378.

Orrell, D. ( 2007). Apollo’s arrow: The science of prediction and the future of everything. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Harper Collins.

Thorngate, W. ( 1976a). In general vs. it depends: Some comments on the Gergen-Schlenker debate. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2, 404-410.

Thorngate, W. ( 1976b). Possible limits on a science of social behaviour. In L. Strickland , F. Aboud , & K. Gergen (Eds.), Social psychology in transition (pp. 121-139). New York, NY: Plenum.

Whittaker, E. ( 1958). From Euclid to Eddington: A study of conceptions of the external world. London, UK: Dover .