I guess this is really about publication, which I support.
There are a number of distinct threads in this discussion which it might
be useful to unravel. Indeed, I thought the point of Bruce's MABS paper
which started this discussion was to point out the differences among
various purposes of MABS and to suggest how they might be addressed.
So, in a sense, this is getting back to the starting point but taking
into account the way the discussion has gone in the meantime.
My suggestion for publication -- because it might identify the different
arguments and support an analysis of the relationships among them -- is
for us to identify the individual threads and for some of those who
participated in each thread to write or compile a note agreeing the
issues and differences among the participants.
As a first stab, I would suggest that at the coarsest grain, there have
been three threads:
1. Issues of application -- whether simulation as description should
be bottom-up or top-down and the conditions in which each is valid.
2. Issues of sociological theory -- nominalism and methodological
individualism versus social realism and Durkheimism
3. Should theory drive application or should application drive theory?
These are not independent but I have the impression that we could
cluster participants and positions around these issues. I imagine that
we could break these down into more fine grained threads -- especially
the second.
--
Professor Scott Moss
Director
Centre for Policy Modelling
Manchester Metropolitan University
Aytoun Building
Manchester M1 3GH
UNITED KINGDOM
telephone: +44 (0)161 247 3886
fax: +44 (0)161 247 6802
http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/~scott
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|