Issue 184， plz comments! thanks in advance

[steven-lau]

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

honestly, I have no idea how to write such topics. it costs me nearly an hour to finish.







Is it a grave mistake to theorize before one has data? The speaker claims so. As far as I am concerned, the issue of whether theorizing brfore one has data is a mistake depends on different stiations. Usually one way for cognition is to collect and analyze sufficient data and then generalize a theory while another way is to propose a theory firstly with teatifying by data or experiments later. So, I disagree that it is a grave mistake to theorizr before one has data.

To begin with, data is the most important part for proposing a theory since it provides the theory solid evidence. The collection and analysis of sufficient data could make a theory more reliable and conventional to those who hold a specious attitude and also give a thoery strong vitality which can endure the test of the time. For most of the nature science sujects, data is indispensible before proposing a theory. For example, chemist usually need to conduct thousand of experiments to attain data to explain the new phenomenon and then propose a brand new theory. In short, if there is merely experience can be acquired from the former researchers, having valid data before the theorizing is necessary.

However, not all the great theories are based on the sufficient data when they are proposed. Hypothesis is also play a vital role when promoting the progress of science. Through critical thinking and rigorous logical deduction, people could give their hypothesis firstly and then prove it with data or experiments or calculation. Usually such hypothesis could be the beacon light for the next exploration. Take the Theory of continental drift as an example, Wegener propose it in the sickbed of a hospital when he had nothing to do but staring a world map on the wall. After he left the hospital, he collected a mass of data all over the world to solidate his hypothesis which was proved to be ture later and made great contribution to the Geology. Accordingly, it can not be considered to be a grave mistake to theorize before having data under certain circumstance.

What is more, to theorize without any data or experience is unreasonable. The theory which is lack of enough evidence would lend no credibility to the scholar. The development of science was founded on the groundsill of valuable truth. Without the support of the data, theorizing was irresponseble. On the other hand, to modificate or even fabricate data to support a theory is more harmful than fantasy. It would harm the fairness of the science research and also would disobey the morality and honesty.

In sum, as what has been mentioned above, it is not always a grave mistake to theorize before one has any data. Audacious hypothesis could provides inspirations for the scholars and indicate the direction of the future research which would bring benefits for people and the society. Inthe final analysis, I disagree with the speaker that it is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data.

[rockybalboa123]

Suggestions:
Its not very useful to mention 'As far as I am concerned'. I believe it can be excluded.
Your essay lacks in examples, It has a very good scope of examples of Einstein's relativity theory, Aristotle's hypothesis that earth is round etc.