ISSUE 184 -B1-嵩嵩@3.2

cousonUID: 2389644

TOPIC: ISSUE184 - "It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data."
WORDS: 497
TIME: 00:44:27
DATE: 2011/2/7 21:08:15

With the development of technology and science, we had made many great discovering and generated many theories. When it comes to whether we should theorize only after we have valid data. Can't we only make discovering and generate universal theories until we have collected enough solid data? Admittedly, abundant and solid data would be helpful in theorizing, however, it is not only factor.
There is no doubt that the more abundant and valid data we have, the closer we can get to the truth in experiments. Mendel, the founder of modern life science, who had discovered the Law of Inheritance, had implemented a large amount of data collection in his famous pea plants experiment. Thousands of pea plants’ characters and even more pea’s properties were collected. With such large amount of data, Mendel had applied statistics method to analyzed pea properties, and generalized the regulations of how gene inherits. Not only Mendel but thousands of scientific researchers, who had found some discovering, had drawn their generalizations of experiment with abundant valid data.
If we over-emphasis on data collecting of an experiment, we might entrap ourselves in data collecting and miss the good timing of theorizing. For perspective of quantity, the amount of data needed is always the more the better, however, in what quantity of data is considered to be enough? I believe that maybe no one can give an exact answer. As a result, we might not dare to theorize as we still fear that the quantity of data is not big enough or it might be representative. On the other hand, if people around consider any theorization should be supported by valid data. It might result in the situation that some researchers would draw out the collection partially of data which can support the conclusion they want to theorize. Or they might even fake data.

There exist some situations that we can hardly collect some valid data then we have to theorize. An apt example is that we can get down to a subject called astrophysics, which studies the mobility and other physical phenomenon of stars. It has been extremely difficult to collect any valid data to theorize any conclusion on this subject. If there exist some, they are sporadic, less systematic and poor in accuracy. Researchers in such subjects can only rely on theorizing consequently. Another fact in point is that the Germen meteorology Wegener who had discovered the Continental Drift Theory. With merely no valid information on relative area but only theoretical speculation and imagination, Wegener had announced an assumption about the Continental Drift Theory. Although data might be insufficient to support such theory in his time, however, Wegener theorized the assumption bravely, and such assumption had been proved some time after.
In sum, even though valid data act an important role in theorizing, yet we can’t trap in data collection while we are do data collection. Literally, we should be encouraged to theorize and valid these assumptions we theorize with solid data.