A model is a simplified representation of some aspect of the world. In what ways may models help or hinder the search for knowledge?

Theory of Knowledge Essay Pinnapa Phetcharatana

Vienna International School IB Candidate No. 000114-082

1

A model is a simplified representation of some aspect of the world. In what ways may

models help or hinder the search for knowledge?

Mathematicians, natural scientists and human scientists rely heavily on models to

simplify complex theories. Forms of models vary according to different areas of knowledge. A

model can be a simplified diagram of how a particular system operates, or it can be a long and

complicated mathematical equation. Highly precise conclusions and hypotheses are required for

constructing a model because it involves limitations and involuntary assumptions. Nevertheless,

models help to provide a better and clearer understanding of certain theories by acknowledging

the fundamentals that are just „on the surface,‟ leaving out details that may add complexity to it.

The simplicity of models assist in the search for knowledge because it provides a general rule

that paints a broad sketch of a certain theory or system which allows one to base one‟s

hypotheses on, and this may result in a flowing succession of new ideas and knowledge.

However, the creation of models rests on certain assumptions that can be falsified at any point,

and models that appear to be too simple or complex may lead to doubting. This essay will

analyze the extent to which models are useful in the search for knowledge.

In the field of human sciences, such as economics and geography, models may be used to

illustrate the framework of systems and cycles. For instance, the two-sector circular flow of

income model used in economics is a simple diagram that illustrates the circulation of money

between households and firms. However, it may appear to be theoretical since it does not take

into account leakages and injections in the economy, such as import expenditure, savings or

taxes. A revised, four-sector circular flow of income model has then been constructed based on

the two-sector model, taking into account the leakages and injections. This example serves to



2

show how new models can be derived from original models. Although revised models are often

more accepted, this does not mean that original models are completely inaccurate or lacking

sufficient information. The older models serve as the basis for succeeding models, and they focus

more on the general theory as a whole rather than the supplement details.

There are often cases where more than one model may be used to represent the same

concept. Both models appear to be equally accurate; however, they are created from different

perspectives. Another example of this can be taken from macroeconomics: John Keynes‟ long-

run aggregate supply curve, represented by a line curving upwards, against the neo-classical

version of the long run aggregate supply curve, shown as a vertical line. Keynes was an

interventionist, while neo-classical economics supported laissez-faire. The sparking of a debate

between the two contrasting viewpoints may lead to either the overriding of one theory over the

other or the dismissal of both theories. Some may be led to make arbitrary judgments in such

dilemmas- for example, adopting the principle of Occam‟s razor, which is to believe in the

simpler model or theory since it appears to be more straightforward and allows more

convenience. Scientists, scholars and educators are constantly debating over the „right‟ types of

models that best represent a situation or idea in the most realistic sense by running experiments

and providing new evidence that refute previous claims. However, in the case of models based

on human science, perhaps it is best to explore and accept different perspectives as there is no

truly accurate answer due to numerous changing variables.

A problem regarding the creation of models in natural sciences is that humans are said to

be incapable of achieving knowledge with absolute certainty. Man-made models thus cannot

always be relied upon in order to solve problems and predict events. Assumptions that lie behind



3

models are subjected to fallibility because they are based on incomplete observations and hence

flawed inductive reasoning. At any point in the future certain theories may be overturned,

whether through direct falsification or a paradigm shift. Consider the cosmological paradigm

shift from Ptolemy‟s geocentric model to the Copernicus‟ heliocentric one. Would it be

appropriate to dismiss the geocentric model as outdated and claim that it is no longer useful in

modeling the solar system? Humans today have became easily convinced by models of the

current generation, just as Aristotle and many ancient Greek philosophers were convinced by

geocentricism at that time. This is why it is important to distinguish between knowledge and

truth and to accept the possibility that knowledge can be invalidated anytime in the future.

Those who realize the fallibility of knowledge might argue that the construction of

models further contribute to dogmatism since it acts as a solid confirmation that a particular

theory must be absolutely true. Dogmatism is considered to be “the unfounded positiveness in

matters of opinion.”1 It is somewhat contrary to the idea of skepticism, the belief that human

beings can never acquire knowledge with full certainty.2 Models constructed based on scientific

assumptions rely on methods that are subjected to fallibility, such as empiricism, inductive

reasoning or trial and error. Perhaps that is why scientific knowledge can never pass as truths.

Firstly, many events occurring in the physical world cannot be perceived and analyzed simply

through the five senses with complete accuracy. Furthermore, inductive reasoning only proves

that a certain fact might be true simply because the evidences verify it, making it wholly

dependent on observations, while trial and error methods focus on finding one solution which

1 "dogmatism." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc.

2 Hooker, Richard; “Skepticism”



4

may not be the best or most efficient among all the possible solutions. Models may hinder the

search for knowledge for these reasons, since humans are now led to doubt the reliability of the

sources of knowledge.

Another complication associated with model-building may be that there are certain

limitations which need to be addressed. These limitations could, for instance, take the form of the

assumption that all other factors are being held constant, such as ceteris paribus.3 This is

necessary especially in human sciences where models attempt to explain human behavior.

Humans behavior is unpredictable and could be affected by unforeseen circumstances; and

because of this, mathematical- or scientific-based models are unlikely to be able to predict highly

precise outcomes. Numbers and equations appear to be logical and rational, but they may be

misleading since they suggest that human behavior can be summed up into objective figures.

How is it possible to determine the satisfaction gained from a consumer of a particular product in

numerical terms? It must be recognized that rational assumptions cannot be made in an

imperfect, irrational world. If limits, such as ceteris paribus, are not acknowledged, then a model

must take into account hundreds of other factors that make precise predictions impossible.

Nevertheless, even though models may not represent reality, they are undoubtedly useful

and play a significant role in the progression of knowledge. Perhaps the purpose of creating a

model is not to firmly assert a claim (as an anti-dogmatist may argue) but rather to have that

claim open for interpretation or experimentation. This is the case for models in natural sciences.

Referring back to Ptolemy‟s and Copernicus‟ cosmological models, it can be observed that the

3 Pietersz, Graeme; “Ceteris Paribus”



5

latter could not exist without disputing the former. Both models rest on the assumption that

planets move in a curved path around a celestial body4; the only obvious difference is what

belongs in the center. Would there be a heliocentric model without the geocentric one? Although

models may not always provide an accurate reflection of reality, they can serve as a guide to

finding more precise knowledge.

The progression of knowledge as a result of model-building can be used to explain the

various scientific phenomena occurring in the world today. Examples may be the following:

How are airplanes able to stay in midair? What makes tall buildings resistant to earthquakes?

The phenomena resulted from the accumulation and advancement of knowledge over a very long

period of time. Models based on facts and ideas were exposed to comments and criticism, and as

a result some models had been dismissed, a few managed to wholly survive through time while

several models were modified on varying levels. The creation of models has undoubtedly

encouraged the progression of knowledge, allowing humans to move in one, forward direction

towards a more sophisticated and precise type of knowledge. Yet, this superior form of

knowledge is not to be confused with truth or certainty.

Models assist humans in the search for knowledge to a certain extent. Simple models

place an emphasis on the fundamentals of a theory, which may allow one to easily grasp the

general rule, although the simple model may appear incomplete and lacking information. More

complex models focus on details and supplements that may be useful for more advanced

purposes; however, the main idea that is being communicated may be clouded. The creation of

4 Rabin, Sheila; “Nicolaus Copernicus”



6

models allows facts to be exposed to interpretation, and this could serve as the main drive for

humans towards more developed and sophisticated knowledge. Nevertheless, model constructors

and scientists must be willing to accept the possibility that their theories may be overturned at

any point in the future. It is best to keep an open mind by addressing the limitations of the

theories and not fall into the arrogance of dogmatism.

Word count: 1,542



7

Works Cited

Hooker, Richard. "Skepticism." World Civilizations. Washington State University, 14 July 1999.

Web. 11 Feb 2011. <http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GLOSSARY/SKEPT.HTM>.

Pietersz, Graeme. "Ceteris Paribus." Money Terms. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Feb 2011.

<http://moneyterms.co.uk/ceteris-paribus/>.

Rabin, Sheila, "Nicolaus Copernicus", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2010

Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =

<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/copernicus/>.

Seaman, David. "Philosophy and Science versus Dogmatism." Web. 11 Feb 2011.

<http://www.chiro.org/ChiroZine/ABSTRACTS/Science_vs_dogmatism.shtml>.

"dogmatism." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 14 Feb. 2011.

<Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dogmatism>.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dogmatism

Documents

A model is a simplified representation of some aspect of the world. In what ways may models help or hinder the search for knowledge?