【Big Fish】3月12日Issue184-By FF

FloridaffUID: 2772878

Issue No.184
"It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data."

Whether a theory, which has no data to prove, can be completely defined a grave mistake, depends primarily on the field in which the theory is researched. I can't completely agree with the speaker's statement that to theorize when one has no data is a grave mistake. In my view, there would be discussed in three different kinds of realms, such as science, arts and society.

Turning first to the realm of science, most theories in the beginning are scientists' hypotheses deduced from some negligible phenomena, lacking further data or convictive experiments. Common sense tells us that truth is always summarized according to their experience at first, even just as a perfect condition which humans can never achieve. For example, Newton, a famous physicist, established the law of inertia, which states that if the vector sum of all forces acting on an object is zero, then the acceleration of the object is zero and its velocity is constant. While the law of inertia is accepted, the situation that all forces acting on an object is zero mentioned in the law of inertia can not be achieved until now. Therefore, some theory simply can come true under certain precondition, which is a perfect state of being impossible to achieve.

Turning next to the realm of arts, it seems to me that it is the expression of private feelings and the criticism of society, which does not necessarily link with data.  Given that it is a form of subjective thoughts, no matter whether one has data it cannot be a grave mistake. For instance, the creation of the theory of Impressionist painting is lack of any data, which Monet first used this define to describe his work of painting. However, absent any data, the theory still has no grave mistake.

Finally, with respect to the theories of society, absolutely, it is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data. Clearly, if one fails to give any reliable data of the conclusion, it should be something unwarranted that no one would believe. For example, a instrument enterprise has a necessary of the reflection of their instrument in the market. Is it trustworthy to theorize a conclusion without any data or survey? Obviously, the answer is "NO". That is why I emphasis the importance of data for the theories in society problem.

In summary, not all that are theorized but without reliable and accurate data is a grave mistake. I concede that it is logically unwarranted that to theorize something absent data. However, some theories in certain fields, which express personal ideas or  establishes in a perfect state of being impossible to achieve, can be accepted without any data.

cloudwind-greUID: 2462220

1# Floridaff
Issue No.184
"It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data."

Whether a theory, which has no data to prove, can be completely defined a grave mistake, 是没有数据时理论化是错误,不是理论本身是错误depends primarily on the field in which the theory is researched. I can't 在作文中最好用can not,can't 有点口语化 completely agree with the speaker's statement that to theorize when one has no data is a grave mistake. In my view, there would be discussed in three different kinds of realms, such as science, arts and society.开头一段意思说得很明确,很好

Turning first to the realm of science, most theories in the beginning are scientists' hypotheses deduced from some negligible phenomena, lacking further data or convictive experiments. Common sense tells us that truth is always summarized according to their experience at first, even just as a perfect condition which humans can never achieve. (这里用了EVEN来我我想不太好,历为experience不知道你这里是写错了还是怎样,我不知道这个词你想用的是experiments还是experience, 因为experiment本身不是一种data吗?,其实楼主可以直接说according to some experiment that humans can never achieve不是更好吗?) For example, Newton, a famous physicist, established the law of inertia, which states that if the vector sum of all forces acting on an object is zero, then the acceleration of the object is zero and its velocity is constant. While the law of inertia is accepted, the situation that all forces acting on an object is zero mentioned in the law of inertia can not be achieved until now. Therefore, some theory simply can come true under certain preconditions, which is are (a) perfect states of being impossible to achieve. 这个点好,有些实验根本不可能达到.

Turning next to the realm of arts, it seems to me that it is the expression of private feelings and the criticism of society, which does do not necessarily link with data. (it is..强调句,后面的that呢?expression of private feeling怎么了?如果是do not link with data which应换成that,前面的逗号不要) Given that it is a form of subjective thoughts, no matter whether one has data it cannot be a grave mistake. For instance, the creation of the theory of Impressionist painting is lack of any data, which Monet first used this define to describe his work of painting. However,这里不是转折关系,是因果关系,我想改用therefore会好点, absent lacking of (absent这个词好像是不及物的哦)any data, the theory still has no grave mistake. 这个点也很新,艺术根本没有data不过我想楼主最发给data下个定义,什么是data?

Finally, with respect to the theories of society, absolutely, it is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data. Clearly, if one fails to give any reliable data of the conclusion, it should be something unwarranted that no one would believe. For example, a instrument enterprise has a necessary of the reflection of their instrument in the market. Is it trustworthy to theorize a conclusion without any data or survey? Obviously, the answer is "NO". That is why I emphasis emphasize (emphasis是名词) the importance of data for the theories in society problem.

In summary, not all that are theorized but without reliable and accurate data is a grave mistake. I concede that it is logically unwarranted that to theorize something absent data. However, some theories in certain fields, which express personal ideas or  establishes in a perfect state of being impossible to achieve, can be accepted without any data.

观点比较新,结构很明确,语言用用得比较合适,虽然词汇和句法没有用到很复杂,但表达起来得明白易懂.
总的来说是不错的,就是论证方面(development)如果可以加强,让文章更insightful就更好了.