Thesis: Successful theories are maps, not attempts to specify necessary and sufficient conditions.

THEORIES ARE MAPS

Let us explore the idea that one way to see what a theory is, and what a theory can do, is to see a theory as a map. We begin with a terrain (a subject matter), and with questions about that terrain. Our questions spur us to build theories – maps of the terrain – that articulate and systematize our answers. To know how to reach Detroit, we need one kind of map. To know how to be a good person, we need another map. Note: Maps do not tell us where we want to go. Our questions predate our theorizing, and constitute our reasons to theorize in the first place.

Theories Are Abstractions

A map of Detroit is an artifact, an invention. So is a map of justice. In neither case does the terrain being mapped really look like that. A map of Detroit is stylized, abstract, and simplified. It otherwise would fail as a map. Yet a map can be accurate in the sense that it does not mislead. A given map will for some purposes have ample detail; for other purposes it will be oversimplified.

A map is not itself the reality. It is at best a serviceable representation. Moral theories likewise are more or less serviceable representations of a terrain. They cannot be more than that.