Emulate小组Issue184

AK_小儿UID: 2784558

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

1 严格来说，没有任何数据是不可能有理论的，任何理论都是建立在一定的数据上
2（1）很多理论的建立都是在先假设的基础上，再来找数据和资料，证明这个假设而得到的。（方向）
（2）想要得到完整的足够的数据再建立理论是不可能的。人不知道怎样丰富程度的资料和数据才算完整，而已经建立的完善的理论也有可能被新出现的数据推翻，从speaker的逻辑角度来看，人类就根本无法建立任何理论。
3 某些领域例如艺术，很多理论的建立本身就不是根据数据得来的，而是根据人类思想灵感等等。

Can we theorize before we have data? Definitely we can’t if there isn’t any data. In this way, I must say that the speaker’s opinion is right. But if it suggests that we can’t theorize until we get enough data, I’ll strongly fight against this propose.

Strictly speaking, no data, no theory. Any theory should be based on some data though the data is less. A theory without any data can’t be called as a theory but a fantasy or somebody’s desire. You can theorize that “the candy is sweet” only after you tasted it. And Newton found gravity at least he got the data of apple’s falling down to the earth. He found gravity not because he is eating an apple or picturing an apple but because he saw an apple’s falling. And that’s the first data he got through theorizing the famous Gravity. From that point, theory can’t be established before we have data.

However, getting much enough data before we theorize is almost impossible. Enough data, though important, is likely to come up with assumption. People usually propose assumption according to some information, then follow this assumption to find more data related to the assumption to prove it, like the establishment of the relativity. That’s the way in which we found most theories. So assumption is more important than data to some extent when considering in this way.
In the other hand, theorizing after getting enough data and information is impossible as well for the reason that we have no ability to know whether the data is enough. Actually, the data won’t be enough forever, because we may discover the data new every time. Simultaneously, a very complete theory can be changed or even turned over with the data’s renew. When facing these mistakes of these theories, should we just wait for a complete series of data and information’s coming up before we theorize? According to this logic, does it mean that we can’t establish any theory then? Obviously, the statement of theorizing before getting enough data is defective in this way.

In addition, I must take some special realms into account, arts, literature and etc. These kinds of theory which is abstract may have little relation with data. They are more about one’s thought and inspiration. Generation of Some school of art(艺术流派) for instance, is just due to some masters’ inspiration.

In sum, the statement giving by the speaker is not so consummate. Indeed, there’s no theory before getting any data, but we need to realize that assumption is important as well when setting up theory, which gives us the direction to theorize better.

有事最后结尾随便写了一下，不全面。求拍。

Andrew_zwiUID: 2670942

Can we theorize before we have data? Definitely we can’t if there isn’t any data. In this way, I must say that the speaker’s opinion is right. But if it suggests that we can’t theorize until we get enough data, I’ll strongly fight against this propose.（可能是我没见到过，但是怎么感觉这句话感情色彩好重啊，在issue里合适吗？ LZ希望可以讨论一下。）

Strictly speaking好！, no data, no theory. Any theory should be based on some data though the data is（用might be会不会好些） less. A theory without any data can’t be called as a theory but a fantasy or somebody’s desire. You can theorize that “the candy is sweet” only after you tasted it. And Newton found gravity at least he got the data of apple’s falling down to the earth. He found gravity not because he is eating an apple or picturing an apple but because he saw an apple’s falling. And that’s the first data he got through theorizing the famous Gravity. From that point, theory can’t be established before we have data.（这个例子不错）

However, getting much（用well会不会顺些，much我好像没见过） enough data before we theorize is almost impossible. Enough data, though important, is likely to come up with assumption（LZ这句话何解？）. People usually propose assumption according to some information, then follow this assumption to find more data related to the assumption to prove it, like the establishment of the relativity. That’s the way in which we found most theories. So assumption is more important than data to some extent when considering in this way.

In the other hand, theorizing after getting enough data and information is impossible as well for the reason that we have no ability to know whether the data is enough. Actually, the data won’t be enough forever, because we may discover the data new every time. Simultaneously, a very complete theory can be changed or even turned over with the data’s renew. When facing these mistakes of these theories, should we just wait for a complete series of data and information’s coming up before we theorize? According to this logic, does it mean that we can’t establish any theory then? Obviously, the statement of theorizing before getting enough data is defective in this way.

In addition, I must take some special realms into account, arts, literature and etc. These kinds of theory which is abstract may have little relation with data. They are more about one’s thought and inspiration. Generation of Some school of art(艺术流派) for instance, is just due to some masters’ inspiration.

In sum, the statement giving by the speaker is not so consummate. Indeed, there’s no theory before getting any data, but we need to realize that assumption is important as well when setting up theory, which gives us the direction to theorize better.

我感觉这个题目论证enough data不是很切题，因为题目是说before one has data 就是without  data, 而非lz 所说的 enough data。
总体感觉这篇相比与上一篇，有点退步。