3
"Thompson, James. P (Jim) A142" schrieb:
> I would be interested to learn what practitioners of system dynamics mean by
> the term mental model. If you refer to a written authority, I would
> appreciate learning what your reference source is.
Kenneth Craik ("The Nature of Explanation", 1943) says: "By a model we thus mean
any physical or chemical system which has a similar relation-structure to that
of the processes it imitates... If the organism carries a small-scale model of
external reality and of its own possible actions within its head, it is able to
try out various alternatives, conclude which is the best of them, react to
future situations before they arise, utilise the knowledge of past events in
dealing with the present and future, and in every way to react in a much fuller,
safer, and more competent manner to the emergencies which face it."
I regard the term "mental model" in Craiks positive, useful sense. Weighed
against this, however, is the constructivist standpoint that we can never prove
the truth of our models, but rather only the falseness of them when they dont
work. This leads then to the rather negative view of models in, for example,
"The Fifth Discipline", in which we are warned not to believe too strongly in
the "truth" of our models, lest they lead us astray. Needless to say, I also
agree with this warning. So the name of the game is therefore to use my models
as much as possible in the hope that they will be useful, but also in the hope
that they will one day fail, and so give me the chance to develop them to even
greater usefulness.
Cheers,
Niall Palfreyman.
From: "Prof. Dr. Niall Palfreyman" <
niall.palfreyman@fh-weihenstephan.de>