Which is the Best Model of the Universe?

In: Culture and Dialogue
Author: Martin Sahlén1
View More View Less
  • 1 Beecroft Institute of Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, University of Oxford, United Kingdom

Purchase instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):


Modern scientific cosmology pushes the boundaries of knowledge and the knowable. This is prompting questions on the nature of scientific knowledge, and the emergence of the new field “Philosophy of Cosmology.” One central issue is what defines a “good” model. I discuss how “good” models are conventionally chosen, and how those methods operate in data-sparse situations: enabling the implicit introduction of value judgments, which can determine inference and lead to inferential polarization, e.g., on the question of ultimate explanation. Additional dimensions for comparing models are needed. A three-legged comparison is proposed: evidence, elegance and beneficence. This explicitly considers the categories of criteria that are always at least implicitly used. A tentative path to an implementation of the proposed model comparison framework is presented. This extends the Bayesian statistical framework. Model comparison methodology is fertile ground for dialogue between the sciences and the humanities. The proposed framework might facilitate such a dialogue.

  • 5

    Norwood Russell Hanson, “Is there a logic of scientific discovery?,” in Australasian Journal of Philosophy 38, 2 (1960): 91-106.

  • 6

    George F. R Ellis, “On the philosophy of cosmology,” in Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 46 (2014): 5-23.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    See Martin Rees, Just Six Numbers (New York: Basic Books, 2001).

  • 10

    See Tom McLeish, Faith & Wisdom in Science (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).

  • 11

    See C.F. von Weizsäcker, The Relevance of Science, Gifford Lectures (New York: Collins, 1964).

  • 12

    Amir D. Aczel, Why Science Does Not Disprove God (New York: William Morrow, 2014).

  • 14

    Alister McGrath, A Fine-Tuned Universe: The Quest for God in Science and Theology (Louisville, K: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009).

  • 17

    See Richard Swinburne, The Existence of God (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004).

  • 18

    See Herman Philipse, God in the Age of Science? A Critique of Religious Reason (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).

  • 20

    See e.g., McGrath, Science & Religion, 132.

  • 21

    John Polkinghorne, Belief in God in the Age of Science (Yale: Yale University Press, 1998).

  • 25

    See Nicholas Maxwell, From Knowledge to Wisdom: A Revolution for Science and the Humanities (London: Pentire Press, 2007); Nicholas Maxwell, How Universities Can Help Create a Wiser World: The Urgent Need for an Academic Revolution (Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2014).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    John Skilling, “Foundations and Algorithms,” in Bayesian Methods in Cosmology, ed. Michael P. Hobson, et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Ian McGilchrist, The Master and his Emissary (Yale: Yale University Press, 2012).

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 358 160 17
Full Text Views 239 5 0
PDF Views & Downloads 15 5 0