Issue184 永不言弃第二十七次作业 by 9#

cameo0320UID: 2599448

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

It is universally acknowledged that data is the base of scientific theory, just as the speaker asserted.
Data and other statistics not only the evidence of a theory but also could help scientist generalize a theory. As far as I am concerned, there are two ways of cognition progress—induction and deduction, both the two methods are rely on data to draw any conclusion. However, data is not always efficient, there still many others should be took accounted when doing research, especially in the humanity and social science.

Admittedly, data which is the factual information used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation could prove or disprove theory hypotheses. It not only could help define some natural facts but also essential in social science. Consider, for instance, data could be compared with the well-developed physical theories. Actually, the great success and universal acceptance of “general theory of relativity” to some extent owe to many exact data and great deal of excels which reflect the persistent efforts of Einstein. The more complete of the data the more convincing the theory is.

Similarly, though some one think data is not as important as it in natural science, the social scientist also should depend on accurate data to prove his or her theory. For example, Huntingdon provides a variety of data to support his theory of "clash of civilizations, such as surveys of the populations of the seven civilizations, the percentage of believers and the economic data . Thus, the theory seems proudly convincing.

Moreover, without data's support a theory is vacant and even fallacy. There are a lot of theories which are more like illusions or fantasies without data as evidence.
Such as “perpetual motion machine” which is a kind of machine without power can provide energy consistently. It is interesting and attractive, yet lack data and practical program to create such machine. Accordingly, it is the province of crackpot science and science fiction. So, in that situation, data may could apart truth and science from fantasy and lie.

However, according to some facts and experiences, there are things which have existed in the world a long time cannot be explained just by data. Or in other words, data cannot prove everything. Can you take advantage of data to illustrate "love" or "hate", and can you use data to explain the potential power of human beings which could result in some unbelievable phenomenon. In short, data is not effective in any circumstance.

In addition, some other factors could play crucial roles in a convincing theory. Actually, due to the logics, one might be able to theorize accurately before one has data. For example, the edifice of mathematics base on the deduction and logical reasoning. Hypothesis is quite essential in theorization and plays an important role in acquiring data. Moreover, these theorizations are not merely fantasies as the speaker has claimed. Actually, they derive from the experience from the past and critical thinking, as well as insight. As time passing by, many conjectures and hypothesis are identified later.

In sum, of course, theory is only convincing after being identified with data demonstration, which means that any substantiated theories must be eventually justified through rigorous data collecting. Without data, the theory will lost its bone and even lead to mistake. Also, in some times, data cannot explain everything, some other elements are needed to prove and enrich a theory—logic and reasoning, or humanity and even affections.

stgzhaoUID: 2583165

It is universally acknowledged that data is the base of scientific theory, just as the speaker asserted.
Data and other statistics not only the evidence of a theory but also could help scientist generalize a theory. As far as I am concerned, there are two ways of cognition progress—induction and deduction, both the two methods are rely（rely） on data to draw any conclusion. However, data is not always efficient, there still many others should be took accounted when doing research, especially in the humanity and social science.
Admittedly, data which is the factual information used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation could prove or disprove theory hypotheses. It not only could help define some natural facts but also essential in social science. Consider, for instance, data could be compared with the well-developed physical theories. Actually, the great success and universal acceptance of “general theory of relativity” to some extent owe to many exact data and great deal of excels which reflect the persistent efforts of Einstein. The more complete of the data the more convincing the theory is.

Similarly, though some one think data is not as important as it in natural science, the social scientist also should depend on accurate data to prove his or her theory. For example, Huntingdon provides a variety of data to support his theory of "clash of civilizations, such as surveys of the populations of the seven civilizations, the percentage of believers and the economic data . Thus, the theory seems proudly convincing.
Moreover, without data's support a theory is vacant and even fallacy. There are a lot of theories which are more like illusions or fantasies without data as evidence.
Such as “perpetual motion machine” which is a kind of machine without power can provide energy consistently. It is interesting and attractive, yet lack data and practical program to create such machine. Accordingly, it is the province of crackpot science and science fiction. So, in that situation, data may could apart truth and science from fantasy and lie.
However, according to some facts and experiences, there are things which have existed in the world a long time cannot be explained just by data. Or in other words, data cannot prove everything. Can you take advantage of data to illustrate "love" or "hate", and can you use data to explain the potential power of human beings which could result in some unbelievable phenomenon. In short, data is not effective in any circumstance.
In addition, some other factors could play crucial roles in a convincing theory. Actually, due to the logics, one might be able to theorize accurately before one has data. For example, the edifice of mathematics base on the deduction and logical reasoning. Hypothesis is quite essential in theorization and plays an important role in acquiring data. Moreover, these theorizations are not merely fantasies as the speaker has claimed. Actually, they derive from the experience from the past and critical thinking, as well as insight. As time passing by, many conjectures and hypothesis are identified later.
In sum, of course, theory is only convincing after being identified with data demonstration, which means that any substantiated theories must be eventually justified through rigorous data collecting. Without data, the theory will lost its bone and even lead to mistake. Also, in some times, data cannot explain everything, some other elements are needed to prove and enrich a theory—logic and reasoning, or humanity and even affections.


基本可以，没什么特殊意见了...