[donnowhy]

> The author is proposing a model that [allegedly] does a good job of explaining why we see unexpected behavior

I agree, and go even further:

models that explain behavior are all we have ever had.

it's all only "models that explain this or that" all the way to the 'bottom'. To suppose we can really directly access the "the real objective truth of what's happening" is to ignore the way in which we connect with the "real objective truth"; the same as fish who ignore the ocean.

to argue about what is really happening is to argue about which words to use to describe what is really happening without noticing the nature of languages/words and frameworks or 'systems of thought' which we are using to argue (and indeed, are arguing about)

all this summed up by this quote from about about the pedagogy programing languages: "Sometimes the truest things can only be said in fiction"