Issue184 【challenge yourself小组】第一次作业 by Icland

IclandUID: 2517723

I fundamentally agree the speaker’s contention that it is a mistake to theorize without data. However, the speaker unfairly generalizes that even the result will turn to be wrong, we could still establish theory without data.

In one important respect I agree with the speaker's contention. The speaker delivers a universal conception that in order to establish an accurate theory we need sufficient data as its support. If it is an axiom, numerous observation and reduplicative examinations are prerequisite to validate the rationality of the presence of the theory firstly, then lay the theory on the background of reality after it was bought forward to approve the equitable of the theory. If it is a hypothesis, even when on the circumstance that there is no irrefutable evidence, observation and analysis based on some of fact are required to guarantee that the hypothesis is a proper guess or attempt with logical thought that point to the direction of gospel. Impossiblely can we find any accurate theory without sufficient data and exists in solitude, for in that case the correctness can be hardly validated. Consider the following examples, even the most obscure philosophical proposition has the meaning of humanism, and the basis of Einstein's theory of relativity contains the fundamental cognition that the speed of light can't be surpassed.

On the other hand, to theorize before one has sufficient data will render the hope of the theoretician-his/her inclination-act on the procedure that s/he search for the date to prove the theory which may render critical mistake. Copernicus and Galileo both contradict the theory of geocentricity one after another, however, based on the veneration of God, the Curia of Holy Roman hunt for numerous data to defend his majesty, nevertheless this kind of effort was proved futile ultimately.

Despite the merits of the speaker's claim, I find it problematic in a crucial respect. Common sense informs me that it is impossible to theorize in the first place without at least some data. How can theorizing without data be dangerous, as the speaker contends, if it is not even possible? While a theory based purely on fantasy might ultimately be born out by empirical observation, it is equally possible that it won't. Thus without prior data a theory is not worth our time or attention.

To sum up, the speaker confuses the essence of theory, and believes that theory can be established even without data. However, to found an accurate theory is a precise procedure, large numbers of creditable data must be prepared to support authoritative of the theory. The speaker’s contention is just too hasty and needed to improve.

[ 本帖最后由 Icland 于 2008-7-27 00:01 编辑 ]