The philosophical literature on simulations has increased dramatically during the past 40 years. Many of its main topics are epistemological. For example, philosophers consider how the results of simulations help explain natural phenomena. This essay’s review treats mainly simulations in the social sciences. It considers the nature of simulations, the varieties of simulation, and uses of simulations for representation, prediction, explanation, and policy decisions. Being oriented toward philosophy of science, it compares simulations to models and experiments and considers whether simulations raise new methodological issues.The essay concludes that several features of simulations set them apart from models and experiments and make them novel scientific tools, whose powers and limits are not yet well understood.
Axtell, R.L., Epstein, J.M., Dean, J.S., Gumerman, G.J., Swedlund, A.C., Harburger, J., et al. (2002). Population growth and collapse in a multiagent model of the Kayenta Anasazi in Long House Valley. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99, 7275-7279.
2.
Aydinonat, N.E. ( 2008). The invisible hand in economics: How economists explain unintended social consequences (INEM Advances in Economic Methodology). London: Routledge.
3.
Bankes, S.C., Lempert, R.L., & Popper, S.W. ( 2001). Computer-assisted reasoning. Computing in Science and Engineering, 3, 71-77.
Berlekamp, E.R., Conway, J.H., & Guy, R.K. ( 1982). Winning ways for your mathematical plays: Vol. 2. Games in particular. London: Academic Press.
6.
Bogen, J., & Woodward, J. ( 1988). Saving the phenomena. Philosophical Review , 97, 303-352.
7.
Brouwers, L., Mäkilä, K., & Camitz, M. ( 2006). Spridning av smittkoppor-simuleringsexperiment (SMI-Rapport Nr 5: 2006 T). Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control Stockholm.
8.
Cartwright, N. ( 1989). Nature’s capacities and their measurement. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
9.
Cartwright, N. ( 1999). The dappled world: A study of the boundaries of science . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Cederman, L.-E. ( 2005). Computational models of social forms: Advancing generative process theory. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 864-893.
11.
Coops, N.C., & Catling, P.C. ( 2002). Prediction of the spatial distribution and relative abundance of ground-dwelling mammals using remote sensing imagery and simulation models . Landscape Ecology, 17, 173-188.
12.
Da Costa, N., & French, S. ( 2003). Science and partial truth: A unitary approach to models and scientific reasoning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
13.
D’Arms, J., Batterman, R., & Górny, K. (1998). Game theoretic explanations and the evolution of justice. Philosophy of Science, 65, 76-102.
14.
Dean, J., Gumerman, G., Epstein, J., Axtell, R., Swedlund, A., Parker, M., et al. (2000). Understanding Anasazi cultural change through agent-based modeling. In T. Kohler & G. Gumerman (Eds.), Dynamics in human and primate societies: Agent-based modeling of social and spatial processes (pp. 179-205). New York: Oxford University Press.
15.
Dokic, J., & Proust, J. (Eds.). (2002). Simulation and knowledge of action. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
16.
Dowling, D. ( 1999). Experimenting on theories. Science in Context, 12, 261-273.
17.
Epstein, J., & Axtell, R. ( 1996). Growing artificial societies: Social science from the bottom-up. Cambridge: MIT Press .
18.
Epstein, J.M. ( 1999). Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity, 4(5), 41-57.
19.
Eubank, S., Guclu, H., Kumar, V.S.A., Marathe, M., Srinivasan, A., Toroczcai, Z., et al. (2004). Modelling disease outbreaks in realistic urban social networks. Nature, 429, 180-184.
20.
Frigg, R., & Hartmann, S. ( 2006). Models in science. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Retrieved October 16, 2009, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/models-science
21.
Frigg, R., & Reiss, J. ( 2009). The philosophy of simulation: Hot new issues or same old stew?Synthese, 169, 593-613.
22.
Giere, R. ( 1988). Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
23.
Giere, R. ( 2004). How models are used to represent reality. Philosophy of Science, 71(Suppl.), S742-S752.
24.
Gilbert, N., & Troitzsch, K.G. (1999). Simulation for the social scientist. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
25.
Goodman, N. ( 1972). Seven strictures on similarity. In N. Goodman (Ed.), Problems and projects (pp. 437-447). New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
26.
Gramelsberger, G. (in press). Deepening the interlinking between modelling and generating evidence by simulation runs. Simulation & Gaming.
27.
Grüne-Yanoff, T. ( 2009a). The explanatory potential of artificial societies. Synthese, 169, 539-555.
28.
Grüne-Yanoff, T. ( 2009b). Learning from minimal economic models, Erkenntnis, 70, 81-99.
29.
Grüne-Yanoff, T. (in press-a). Agent-based models as policy decision tools: The case of small-pox vaccination. Simulation & Gaming.
30.
Grüne-Yanoff, T. (in press-b). Artificial worlds and simulation. In J. Zamora Bonilla & I. Jarvie (Eds.), Sage handbook of philosophy of social science. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
Guala, F. ( 2005). The methodology of experimental economics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Hales, T.C. ( 2005). A proof of the Kepler conjecture. Annals of Mathematics, 162, 1065-1185.
33.
Hartmann, S. ( 1996). The world as a process: Simulations in the natural and social sciences. In R. Hegselmann, U. Mueller, & K. Troitzsch (Eds.), Modelling and simulation in the social sciences from the philosophy of science point of view (pp. 77-100). Dordrecht , Netherlands: Kluwer.
34.
Haug, E. ( 1981). Engineering safety analysis via destructive numerical experiments (EURO-MECH 12). Polish Academy of Sciences, Engineering Transactions, 29(1), 39-49.
35.
Hausman, D.M. ( 1992). The inexact and separate science of economics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36.
Hempel, C.G. ( 1965). Aspects of scientific explanation. New York: Free Press.
37.
Huberman, B., & Glance, N. ( 1993). Evolutionary games and computer simulations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 90, 7716-7718.
38.
Huggins, E.M., & Schultz, E.A. ( 1973). The San Francisco bay and delta model. California Engineer, 51, 11-23.
39.
Hughes, R.I.G. ( 1999). The Ising model, computer simulation, and universal physics . In M. S. Morgan & M. Morrison (Eds.), Models as mediators: Perspectives on natural and social science (pp. 97-145). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
Humphreys, P. ( 1991). Computer simulations. In A. Fine, M. Forbes, & L. Wessels (Eds.), PSA 1990 (Vol. 2, pp. 497-506). East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.
41.
Humphreys, P. ( 2004). Extending ourselves: Computational science, empiricism, and scientific method. New York: Oxford University Press.
42.
Humphreys, P. ( 2009). The philosophical novelty of computer simulation methods . Synthese, 169, 615-626.
43.
Küppers, G., & Lenhard, J. ( 2005). Validation of simulation: Patterns in the social and natural sciences. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 8(4). Retrieved February 22, 2006, from http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/8/4/3.html
44.
Lehtinen, A., & Kuorikoski, J. (2007). Computing the perfect model: Why do economists shun simulation? Philosophy of Science, 74, 304-329.
45.
Lempert, R.J. ( 2002). New decision sciences for complex systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(Suppl. 3), 7309-7313.
46.
Mäki, U. ( 1994). Isolation, idealization and truth in economics. In B. Hamminga & N. De Marchi (Eds.), Idealization-VI: Idealization in economics (Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, Vol. 38, pp. 7-68). Amsterdam : Rodopi.
47.
Marimon, R., McGrattan, E., & Sargent, T.J. ( 1990). Money as a medium of exchange in an economy with artificially intelligent agents. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control , 14, 329-373.
48.
Maynard Smith, J. ( 1982). Evolution and the theory of games. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
49.
Menger, C. ( 1982). On the origin of money. Economic Journal , 2, 239-255.
50.
Mill, J.S. ( 1843). A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive. In Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. (Toronto: University of Toronto press)
51.
Morgan, M.S. ( 2003). Experiments without material intervention: Model experiments, virtual experiments and virtually experiments. In H. Radder (Ed.), The philosophy of scientific experimentation (pp. 217-235). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
52.
Morgan, M.S., & Morrison, M. ( 1999). Models as mediating instruments. In M. S. Morgan & M. Morrison (Eds.), Models as mediators: Perspectives on natural and social science (pp. 10-37). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
53.
Parker, W. ( 2009). Does matter really matter? Computer simulations, experiments and materiality. Synthese, 169, 483-496.
54.
Reiss, J. (in press). A plea for simulations. Simulation & Gaming .
55.
Rohrlich, F. ( 1991). Computer simulation in the physical sciences. Philosophy of Science Association, 2, 507-518.
56.
Ruphy, S. (in press). Learning from a simulated universe: The limits of realistic modeling in astrophysics and cosmology. Simulation & Gaming .
57.
Samuelson, L. ( 1997). Evolutionary games and equilibrium selection. Cambridge: MIT Press.
58.
Sawyer, R.K. ( 2004). Social explanation and computational simulation. Philosophical Explorations, 7, 219-231.
59.
Schelling, T. ( 1971). Dynamic models of segregation. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 1, 143-186.
60.
Schuster, P., & Sigmund, K. ( 1983). Replicator dynamics. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 100, 533-538.
61.
Schweber, S., & Waechter, M. ( 2000). Complex systems, modelling and simulation. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 31, 583-609.
62.
Skyrms, B. ( 1990). The dynamics of rational deliberation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
63.
Skyrms, B. ( 1996). Evolution of the social contract. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
64.
Simon, H.A. ( 1969). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge : MIT Press.
65.
Simpson, J. (in press). Identity crisis: Simulations and models. Simulation & Gaming.
66.
Stöckler, M. ( 2000). On modelling and simulations as instruments for the study of complex systems. In M. Carrier (Ed.), Science at century’s end: Philosophical questions on the progress and limits of science. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
67.
Sugden, R. ( 2000). Credible worlds: The status of theoretical models in economics. Journal of Economic Methodology, 7, 1-31.
68.
Suppes, P. ( 2002), Representation and invariance of scientific structures . Stanford, CA: CSLI.
69.
Szpiro, G. ( 2003). Does the proof stack up? Nature, 424, 12-13.
70.
Taylor, P., & Jonker, L. ( 1978). Evolutionarily stable strategies and game dynamics. Mathematical Biosciences, 40, 145-156.
71.
Teller, P. ( 2001). Twilight of the perfect model. Erkenntnis , 55, 393-415.
72.
Tesfatsion, L. ( 2007). Agent-based computational economics: A constructive approach to economic theory. In L. Tesfatsion & K. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of computational economics (Vol. 2, pp. 1-50). Amsterdam : Elsevier.
73.
Thurston, W. ( 1994). On proof and progress in mathematics. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 30, 161-177.
74.
van Fraassen, B.C. ( 1980). The scientific image. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
75.
Weirich, P. ( 2004). Realistic decision theory: Rules for nonideal agents in nonideal circumstances. New York: Oxford University Press.
76.
Weirich, P. ( 2008). The explanatory power of models and simulations: A philosophical exploration. Simulation & Gaming. DOI:10.1177/1046878108319639.
77.
Weisberg, M. ( 2006). Robustness analysis. Philosophy of Science , 73, 730-742.
78.
Williamson, T. ( 2007). The philosophy of philosophy. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
79.
Winsberg, E. ( 2001). Simulations, models, and theories: Complex physical systems and their representations. Philosophy of Science, 68(Suppl.):S442-S454.
80.
Winsberg, E. ( 2003). Simulated experiments: Methodology for a virtual world . Philosophy of Science, 70, 105-125.
81.
Winsberg, E. ( 2009). A tale of two methods. Synthese, 169, 575-592.
