Issue 184 求猛拍~

LRXSSUID: 2695903

Is it a grave mistake, as the author said, to theorize before one has data? 我现在觉得开头用疑问句重复一遍题目没必要，直接阐明观点即可 In so far, I concede the broad assertion that it is a risk to theorize before collecting enough data. However, the author overlooked that some theories come from hypotheses which is not demonstrated bydata 感觉语法有点问题。。。改成that some theories coming from hypotheses are not demonstriated by data. And also, the author ignored that some of the theories tend to be tooideal to be proved by data.

开头最好重复一下这段的观点All the theories are simulations to theworld we are living。。理论是我们世界的模仿？, including the universe, the nature, the society, etc. We use them to recognize the world better than how we did before the theories appeared. That is why we should test all of them one by one with data which we collected from the real world（我觉得因果关系有点偏。理论可以帮助我们更好的认识世界，所以我们要用从现实世界搜集的证据证明？）. Researchers never expect a theory to suit forthe whole universe; actually no theory has got such fitness so far. However, ifa so-called “theory” cannot be examined, or is examined as false, for everywhere,it is useless for human to realize the world, and consequently it is not atheory. 我不是很明白啊。。。汗 Only after the test by data we collected, a hypothesis can be treated as theory which may emerge in textbook or articles 这段举个例子就更好了.

The process of theorization, however,includes not merely testing theory. The process of putting forward hypothesisis also a significant part. Take agenda setting theory in communication as anexample. Based on previous research of Lazarsfeld and other socialists, MaxwellMcCombs and Donald Shaw hypothesized the news agenda in newspaper waspositively related to that in readers’ consideration, which was a stronginfluence of media to the public. Till nowadays, many of researchers all aroundthe world have been busily collecting data to prove this theory at everyaspect. Nevertheless, the prime contribution of this theory should be attributedto McCombs and Shaw, who gave this hypothesis first.这句话感觉有点偏。。你说这个得归功于发明的这个人。。。好像和你的论点没太多关系。。如果非要加的话，最好还是通过解释能回到原论点。

Furthermore, some of the hypothesis cannotget enough data to demonstrate, yet we also treat it as theory. Such condition alwaysoccurred in physics research. For most theories 太绝对了，物理实验大部分都是在无摩擦的理想状况?were presented in ideal conditionssuch like no rub, absolute empty, etc., all the physics experiments cannot ownsuch conditions when collecting data. At this case, some of the researchersbuilt ideal experiments in their brains. For instance, when Galileo presentedhis theory of inertia, he used an ideal experiment 实验具体是什么？。。还是稍微展开一下为宜to demonstrate that a movingball will keep moving with a constant speed when it is moving on a road whichis absolutely smooth. Even nowadays scientists cannot construct an absolutelysmooth road to prove this theory, however, this inertia theory has been putinto physics textbooks all over the world.

In conclusion, data is an important part ofthe process of theorization, yet it is not the whole process. If researchersput too much attention into collecting data, they will always lose the chanceof creating theory and building ideal model of experiment. How to balance theboth parts is the key of success in scientific research.

感觉逻辑关系还得加强。。。我也是最近才意识到的。。。欢迎探讨