what exactly does "useful fiction(s)" mean? [closed]

Solution 1:

I can illustrate this with a personal example. When working on a scientific problem I sometimes see the solution vaguely, make a rough attempt to assemble the data that might support my idea, try to test the idea with the data, find errors, correct them, go back to the problem to see if I still understand it, criticise my solution, go back to find more data, analyse them in different ways, go back to the solution and then the problem - and gradually by ranging around over all these things I form a line of argument that seems to progress inevitably with cold logic and objectivity through a sequence of problem, data, concepts, analysis and solution.

This line of argument is the one conventionally used to publish the work I did but in truth its "inevitable progression" is merely a useful fiction that justifies my writing the account in the conventional objective and understandable way. Few people would be interested in the confused, subjective and creative truth behind the useful fiction of the inevitable, coldly objective march of science.