Abstract
The direct fiction view of scientific models is an account of the nature of models and of their representational capacity. First I present the claims that purport to show the superiority of this account over the indirect approaches and I then show in what respects these claims fail to deliver on their promises.
Worse yet, direct fictionalism does not appear to be an account of scientific modeling and if taken to be one then it seems contradictory in its own terms. I argue that the direct fictionalism fails to enlighten the scientific practice and should be rejected on those grounds.