Abstract
Abstraction and idealization are two notions that are most often discussed in the context of assumptions employed in the process of model-building. However, closer inspection shows that the standard construal of these notions turns out to be problematic.
I further argue against a recent attempt to pick a fight with the mechanistic account of explanation. As the objection goes, the mechanistic view of explanation cannot account for the practices of idealization.
Using an example from molecular biology that the critics themselves rely on, I argue that the objection is misguided because the critics fail to adequately characterize both abstraction and idealization. Finally, I caution others to pay more attention when speaking of abstraction and idealization in a context where these concepts play a significant role, such as the one on mechanistic explanation.
Arguably, this is important as some have embraced the criticism without realizing that it builds on confused notions.