Idealizations and Partitions: A Defense of Robustness Analysis

• Published in: European journal for philosophy of science Vol. 11; no. 4
• Main Authors: Fuller, Gareth P., Schulz, Armin W.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01-12-2021; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Discharge; Education; Paper in Philosophy of Science in Practice; Philosophy; Philosophy of Science; Robustness; robustness analysis; model; idealization; confirmation
• ISSN: 1879-4912; 1879-4920
• DOI: 10.1007/s13194-021-00428-8

We argue that the robustness analysis of idealized models can have confirmational power. This responds to concerns recently raised in the literature (especially by Odenbaugh & Alexandrova), according to which (a) the robustness analysis of models whose idealizations are not discharged is unable to confirm the causal mechanisms underlying these models, and (b) the robustness analysis of models whose idealizations are discharged is unnecessary. In response, we make clear that, where idealizations sweep out, in a specific way, the space of possibilities— which is sometimes, though not always, the case—they can be holistically discharged. In turn, this can be used to show that the robustness analysis of idealized models can have confirmational force after all.