There's a systematic bias against empiricism because data explosion makes our heads hurt, and rationalism looks like an aspirin. ...
-
Show this thread
-
... But in the long game, data beats theory every time.
4 replies 4 retweets 42 likesShow this thread -
... And for the grammar nazis out there, the singularization of "data" illustrates the point.
1 reply 0 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Outsideness
Not sure I am with you this time. Sounds like the correspondence theory of truth while the coherence theory is far more plausible IMHO, see Quine. My interpretation is that we not only test theory against data, but also data against data, theory against theory and even data a.t.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DividualsTweet
Correspondence doesn't come into things any more intrusively with empiricism than with rationalism. Feedback from real performance is the crucial factor. ...
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Outsideness
But you were hinting at the idea that "raw givens" exist. While it is perfectly possible to mismeasure, miscollect data. Did this work / performance / outcomes are not simply data. They are something more fundamental. You cannot just mistakenly observe you are alive when dead...
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes
"Raw" is an interesting notion here. Insofar as it means "uncooked by preconceptions" it has to be a thing, at least to some extent, or real feedback would be impossible.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.