issue184 求拍~~~~

LRXSSUID: 2695903

求指点~~~不甚感激

TOPIC: ISSUE184 - "It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data."

Is it appropriate to theorize before one has data? Generally speaking, I contend that data, which could be defined as relevant believable proof, is in desperate need before we make a conclusion. And, if we don't rely on concrete data to make deduction, the judgment could be unjustifiable. However, under some specific circumstance, we should summon up our courage to have original ideal even if we are lacking in pertinent evidence.

In the first place, as illustrated by a brilliant brain, “practice is the sole criterion for testing truth”. That is to say, without relevant practical experiments, we couldn't assert a view is truth, which is regarded as a general scientific idea. In the field of physics, from Galileo to Edison, we could see a couple of examples which reflect the importance of the proof. When the idea that heavier objects fall faster than the light ones had ruled people for thousands of
years, Galileo raised a complete different view that the object's falling speed is impertinent to the weight. He didn't allege his view by saying empty words or giving useless speeches. Instead, he made a famous experiment on the Leaning Tower Pisa, which made his contention more reasonable. If Galileo didn't use relevant evidence to prove his theory, what would happen? Few people will trust him and people will regard his theory as ridiculous saying. Likewise, Edison made inventions based on numerous trials.  He tried thousands of kinds of materials before he found the most suitable one which could be applied to the filament. Without the enough data he had collected, he couldn't get the final solution to the problem. Hence, we could see the necessity of getting data in making a scientific theory.

Moreover, simply alleging an idea without theory couldn't be trustworthy. This is because people tend to make conclusions which meet their own interest or perspectives. If so, the conclusion could only appeal to his own expectation rather than a natural regulation. In ancient times, when our technology isn't so developed, the church and the Pope made a wrong conclusion that the sun and other planets travel around the earth and the earth is the center of the universe. The theory could stem from the desire expecting humanity is the most significant species and our self-centered idea, which could be our own expectation. The subsequent experiments prove the inaccuracy of the assertion. But the Pope did every effective hatchet job on the right views of the scientists. Therefore, we could see conclusion without relevant data isn't believable. What was worse, it may prevent us from getting the truth and cause meaningless fights, which could postpone the development of our civilization.

However, in some certain situations, we could get a contrary view. This is because getting enough data is impossible under some circumstances. When Broglie exposed his brilliant idea concerning wave-particleduality, little evidence could be seen from his paper. The original idea just comes from another converse view. If Broglie didn't give his thought to the world until he got enough data, the development of the physics could be postponed. Moreover, when Newton established his laws concerning mechanism, he didn't get enough data either. As a matter of fact, the experiment which could prove the theory requires strict condition that couldn't be satisfied. So in some specific cases, we should put forward our original ideas rather than waiting to get enough evidence. After all, we may fall into a circulation of getting endless data instead of making a theory.

In sum, the scientific attitude-getting data before making a decision should be advocated due to only through concrete results rather than complete envision could we see the credibility of our theories. However, under certain circumstances, we should propose our ideas instead of waiting until we get enough data.

晓樟UID: 2846325

ISSUE184 - "It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data."

Is it appropriate to theorize before one has data? Generally speaking, I contend that data, which could be defined as relevant relatively believable proof, is in desperate need before we make a conclusion. And, if we don't rely on concrete data to make a deduction, the judgment could be unjustifiable. Under some specific circumstance, however, we should summon up our courage to have dare to put forward the original ideal even if we are lacking in pertinent sufficient evidence.

In the first place, as illustrated by a brilliant brain, “practice is the sole criterion for testing truth”. That is to say, without relevant practical experiments, we couldn't assert a view is truth, which is regarded as a general scientific idea. In the field of physics, from Galileo to and Edison, we could see a couple of examples which reflect the importance of the proof. When the idea that heavier objects fall faster than the light ones had ruled people for thousands of years, Galileo raised a complete different view that the object's falling speed is impertinent to the its weight. He didn't allege his view by saying empty words or giving useless speeches. Instead, he made a famous experiment on the Leaning Tower Pisa, which made his contention more reasonable. If Galileo didn't use relevant evidence a reliable experiment to prove his theory, what would happen? Few people will would mistrust him and people will regard his theory as a ridiculous saying. Likewise, Edison made inventions based on numerous trials.  He tried thousands of kinds of materials before he found the most suitable one with which bulbs could be furnished as the filament. Without the enough data he had collected, he couldn't get the final solution to the problem. Hence, In both cases above, we could see the necessity importance of getting data in making a scientific theory.
看到这里，我觉得你有必要在前面就给你文章中的DATA下个适合你例子的定义

Moreover, simply alleging an idea without reliable data couldn't be trustworthy. This is because people tend to make conclusions which meet their own interest or perspectives purposes. If so, the conclusion could only appeal to his own expectation rather than a natural regulation. In ancient times, when our technology isn't so developed, the church and the Pope made a wrong conclusion that the sun and other planets travel around the earth and the earth is the center of the universe. The theory could stem from the ego-driven desire expecting humanity is the most significant species and our self-centered idea, which could be our own expectation is basically a superstition. The subsequent experiments prove the inaccuracy of the assertion. But the Pope did every effective hatchet job on the right views of the scientists.(这句话对结论没有帮助，可以删去) Therefore, we could see conclusion without relevant data isn't believable. What was worse, it may prevent us from getting the truth and cause meaningless fights（宗教维护地心说是出于政治统治，因此不能单纯认为可靠数据能解决纷争，这点再考虑下）, which could postpone the development of our civilization.
（如果要引入宗教，就不再是简单的数据和理论的关系了，我觉得妨碍文明推进可以写，但是要让读者觉得个中原因是缺乏资料而非宗教阻挠）

Under some circumstances, However, since getting enough data is impossible to a certain extent, we might get a contrary view. When Broglie exposed his brilliant idea concerning wave-particleduality, little evidence could be seen from his paper. This original idea merely comes from another converse view. If Broglie didn't give his thought to the world until he got enough data, the development of the physics could be postponed. Moreover, when Newton established his laws concerning mechanism, he didn't get enough data either. As a matter of fact, the experiment which could prove the laws requires strict conditions that couldn't be satisfied. So in some specific cases, we should put forward our original ideas rather than wait to get enough evidence. After all, we may fall into a circulation of getting endless data instead of making a theory.(我觉得例子的论证不完整，如果能添加上关于后人用data证明例子中理论的正确性，以说明THEORY和 DATA在时间上存在对置的关系，这样就更有说服力了)

In sum, the scientific attitude-getting data before making a decision should be advocated due to only through concrete results rather than complete envision could we see the credibility of our theories. However, under certain circumstances, we should propose our ideas instead of waiting until we get for enough data.

写些自己粗糙的想法，若对你有帮助，甚好；如有不当之处，见谅！