寄托天下
查看: 1600|回复: 2

[i习作temp] Issue184 欢迎拍文 7.12 [复制链接]

Rank: 2

声望
0
寄托币
119
注册时间
2010-7-11
精华
0
帖子
0
发表于 2010-7-12 20:34:47 |显示全部楼层
Issue 184"It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data."

Whether theorizing is a grave mistake, before one has data, depends primarily on the specific area. When it comes to the domain appropriate to measure the data, I strongly agree with the statement; data is the powerful force to support the theory.

As a threshold matter, the statement requires qualification in one aspect. In certain areas there is no data to speak of before theorizing. That’s to say, owing to the limitation of measure methodology, this statement fails to consider in certain other areas a theory typically involve no data. This is especially true in art. After all, what data is there before theorizing?

  Apart from the qualification, I strongly agree that it is true that theorize before one has data is a grave mistake. There is dear benefit of doing so. Data is the guarantee of validity of theory, which provide a concrete evidence for the abstract theory with just standard. Moreover, it brings to public an acceptable point of view to understand the obscure theories and principle, therefore applying to practice, and even motivating some more advanced idea.

Nevertheless, redundant data collecting work has the potential harm. Going too far is as bad as not going far enough, meaning that undue emphasis on data may hinder the forming of theory. For instance, if we adhere to the speaker’s claim that, some theory such as the Moving Continent must be unconvincing to the mass.

In sum, aside from certain academic areas in which data before theorizing does not exit, it is acceptable for mass that theorize after one has data.


使用道具 举报

Rank: 4

声望
1
寄托币
435
注册时间
2009-11-23
精华
0
帖子
25
发表于 2010-7-12 20:53:53 |显示全部楼层
1.不够长。
2.范文的味道太浓。不可陷入背范文的深渊中!
3.如果是默写的话,确实不错,至少你懂得了句式和结构!

使用道具 举报

Rank: 2

声望
1
寄托币
252
注册时间
2010-7-4
精华
0
帖子
0
发表于 2010-7-13 10:47:28 |显示全部楼层
作者应该是缺少例子

说下我的观点把:
THS:先有数据还是先有理论并不是评判一个理论是否正确的标准,真正的评判标准是在理论形成几十年,几百年后后人获得的数据。
TH1: 的确有些在没有数据时就得出理论是错误的,但这不是grave mistake,这只是人类探索世界的必经阶段。我举的亚里士多德的例子,虽然他很多理论在现在看来都是错的,但他却开创了很多学科,贡献不小。
TH2: 也有没有数据但理论正确的例子,如亚当斯密的国富论,马克思的资本论等。
TH3: 当然也有即使有数据支持,但却不完全正确的理论,因为获得的数据不是完全客观的。客观数据才是真理。

使用道具 举报

RE: Issue184 欢迎拍文 7.12 [修改]

问答
Offer
投票
面经
最新
精华
转发
转发该帖子
Issue184 欢迎拍文 7.12
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1121705-1-1.html
复制链接
发送
回顶部