Not quite right. Understand the sentiment, but the later sounds like the appropriate scientific testing of hypotheses.
-
-
-
Science does not actually work that way (see Feyerabend, Against Method). Also...http://www.jove.com/blog/2012/05/03/studies-show-only-10-of-published-science-articles-are-reproducible-what-is-happening …
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
if you read books and look for questions, you'll generate insight. If you have questions and read books, you'll generate noise.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
does anybody ever have questions without having at least *some* data first?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
if you have questions and look for data, you'll find confirmation bias.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
usually you tend to do a bit of both
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
did u just remove all existential angst?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
For the latter, you’re more likely to generate the answers you wanted a priori
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
better to have answers and look for data instead of questions
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ironically, Daniel Kahneman describes working with Tversky to make "heuristic" a household term (T,F&S pp6-10) using the latter method.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.