TRANSPORT MODELS, PHILOSOPHY, AND LANGUAGE: EXPLORING ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVES FOR ENHANCED TRANSPORT PLANNING
TRANSPORT MODELS, PHILOSOPHY, AND LANGUAGE: EXPLORING ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVES FOR ENHANCED TRANSPORT PLANNING
Ключевые слова:
transport modelling, philosophy of science, linguistic activity, communication process, metaphorical approach, narrative approach.Аннотация
This paper aims to initiate a discussion regarding the philosophical underpinnings of transport modelling practices by analyzing their evolution over the past six decades. It arguesthat a shift in philosophy is necessary to better align with current modelling approaches, perceiving transportation modeling as a linguistic activity within the context of transport planning, which itself is viewed as a communication process. The article outlines three potential approaches for rethinking transport models from metaphorical, narrative, and aesthetic perspectives. It concludes by suggesting future research directions that incorporate formal philosophical thinking into transport modelling research and practice.
Библиографические ссылки
Checkland, P., & Holwell, S. (2018). Systems thinking, strategic assumption surfacing and soft systems methodology: An introduction to a managerial approach to organisational design and problem-solving. Routledge.
Czarniawska, B. (2004). The narrative organization: A theoretically grounded approachto organizational analysis. Oxford University Press.
Dantzig, G. B., & Van Ryzin, G. J. (2005). Foundations of optimization: From linear programming to support vector machines. Springer Science + Business Media.i
Dijkstra, A., & Timmermans, H. J. (2013). The evolution of transport modeling: From deterministic to stochastic models. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 58, 1-16.
Giere, R. N. (1988). Scientific perspectives: Constructing the reality of science. University of Minnesota Press.
Holling, C. S. (2001). Understanding complexity: Essays toward a systematic approach to a science of adaptability. Island Press.
Kaufmann, R., & Pfaffhuber, M. (2013). Urban mobility as an ecosystem service: The role of public transport in the provision of urban ecosystem services. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 24, 67-79.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. Routledge.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Landry, Y. M. (2016). The aesthetic dimension in urban transport planning: A review of the literature and a call for action. Journal of Urban Design, 19(3), 407-425.
Mustaeva, G. S., Saidivalieva, B. S., & Ataeva, G. B. (2022, June). Features of professional vocabulary and its difference from terms. In American Institute of Physics Conference Series (Vol. 2432, No. 1, p. 060017).
Mustaeva, G., & Ataeva, G. (2023, May). The role of business English in modern logistics. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 402, p. 08008).
Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innov5a1t2ion. Oxford University Press.
Polkinghorne, R. F. (2007). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Routledge.
Tufte, E. R. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information (2nd ed.). Graphics Press.
Zhang, X., Chen, H., & Liu, J. (2019). Visualizing transportation impact on air quality with an interactive web mapping application. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 68, 23-33.
