Thanks Terry for the link and the excerpt.
What I find fascinating is the neo-platonician approach to modelling
reality... not to mention that the comparison between a mental model
and a formal model is questionnable, if not a flaw.
A kind of testimony of the good old times...
But it says something quite deep about the discussion that is running
as well.
Regards,
Jean
****************************
Inability of the human mind to use its own mental models becomes clear
when a computer model is constructed to reproduce the assumptions
contained
in a
person's mental model. The computer model is refined until it fully
agrees
with
the perceptions of a particular person or group. Then, usually, the
system
that has
been described does not act the way the people anticipated. There are
internal
contradictions in mental models between assumed structure and assumed
future
consequences. Ordinarily assumptions about structure and internal
governing
policies are more nearly correct than are the assumptions about implied
behaviour.
By contrast to mental models, system dynamics simulation models are
explicit about assumptions and how they interrelate. Any concept that
can be
clearly described in words can be incorporated in a computer model.
Constructing
a computer model forces clarification of ideas. Unclear and hidden
assumptions
are exposed so they may be examined and debated.
The primary advantage of a computer simulation model over a mental
model lies in the way a computer model can reliably determine the future
dynamic
consequences of how the assumptions within the model interact with one
another.
==== Full text available
http://sysdyn.clexchange.org/sdep/Roadmaps/RM1/D-4468-2.pdf
|