Against the inappropriate use of numerical
representation in social simulation
By: Bruce Edmonds
Date: 22nd January 2004
CPM Report No.: CPM-04-129
Introduction
All tools have their advantages and
disadvantages and for all tools there are times when they are
appropriate and times when they are not. Formal tools are no
exception to this and systems of numbers are examples of such formal
tools. Thus there will be occasions where using a number to
represent something is helpful and times where it is not. To use
a tool well one needs to understand that tool and, in particular, when
it may be inadvisable to use it and what its weaknesses are.
However we are in an age that it
obsessed by numbers. Governments spend large amounts of money
training its citizens in how to use numbers and their declarative
abstractions (graphs, algebra etc.) We are surrounded by numbers
every day in: the news, whether forecasts, our speedometers and our
bank balance. We are used to using numbers in loose, almost
“conversational” ways – as with such concepts as the rate of inflation
and our own “IQ”. Numbers have become so famliar that we no more worry
about when and why we use them than we do about natural language.
We have lost the warning bells in our head that remind us that we may
be using numbers inappropriately. They have entered (and
sometimes dominate) our language of thought. Computers have
exasperbated this trend by making numbers very much easier to
store/manipulate/communicate and more seductive by making possible
attractive pictures and animations of their patterns. More
subtley, when thought of as calculating machines that can play games
with us and simulate the detail of physical systems, they suggest that
everything comes down to numbers.
For this reason it is second nature for
us to use numbers in our social simulations and we frequently do so
without considering the consequences of this choice. This paper
is simply a reminder about numbers: a call to remember that they are
just another (formal) tool; it recaps some of the conditions which
indicate when a number is applicable and when it might be misleading;
it looks at some of the dangers and pitfalls of using numbers; it
considers some examples of the use of numbers; and it points out that
we now have some viable alternatives to numbers that are not any less
formal but which may be often preferable.
So, to be absolutely clear, I am not
against numbers per se, merely against their thoughless and
inappropriate use. Numbers are undeniably extremely useful for
many purposes, including as language of thought – just not for every
purpose and in every domain. Also, to be absolutely clear, I do
not think there is any system of representation that is superior to the
others – including: logic; programs; natural language or neural
networks – but that different representations will be more useful (and
less misleading) in different circumstances and for different
purposes. Some of my best friends are numbers.
Accessible as: