Puzzled by Idealizations and Understanding Their Functions. Issue 3 (June 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mäki, Uskali
• Other Names: Cheung Chor-yung guest-editor.; Di Iorio Francesco guest-editor.; Dumouchel Paul guest-editor.; Gotoh Reiko guest-editor.; Tamthai Mark guest-editor.; Yoshida Kei guest-editor.
• Is Part Of: Philosophy of the social sciences. Volume 50:Issue 3(2020)
• Page Start: 215
• Page End: 237
• Publication Date: 2020-06
• Subjects: idealization -- ideal type -- ideal and non-ideal theory -- minimal model -- benchmark model -- how-possibly model -- negligibility -- applicability; Social sciences -- Periodicals; Social sciences -- Methodology -- Periodicals; Sciences sociales -- Périodiques; Sciences sociales -- Méthodologie -- Périodiques; 300.1
• DOI: 10.1177/0048393120917637
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0048-3931

Abstract

Idealization is ubiquitous in human cognition, and so is the inclination to be puzzled by it: what to make of ideal gas, infinitely large populations, homo economicus, perfectly just society, known to violate matters of fact? This is apparent in social science theorizing (from J. H. von Thünen, J. S. Mill, and Max Weber to Milton Friedman and Thomas Schelling), recent philosophy of science analyzing scientific modeling, and the debate over ideal and non-ideal theory in political philosophy (since John Rawls). I will offer a set of concepts and principles to improve transparency about the precise contents of idealizations (in terms of negligibility, applicability, tractability, and early-step status) and their distinct functions (such as contributing to minimal modeling, benchmark modeling, and how-possibly modeling).