Abstract
It has been standard in the philosophy of models to distinguish between their having epistemic value and ‘mere’ heuristic value. This dichotomy has divided philosophers of economics: sceptics deny the epistemic value of theoretical economic models; optimists argue how-possibly explanations offered by models have epistemic value. I argue that the dichotomy has been historically contingent and, importantly, vis-a-vis- theories. We no longer distinguish theories and models so neatly. I further suggest that the optimists' urge to defend the epistemic value of models has often led them to mischaracterise economic practice. I illustrate with a case.
