"The apparent simplicity of a model is due to a failure of imagination and limited data, unless the domain really is simple. If the world were really random, chemistry, cooking, and credit would not be possible, so our models cannot be figments of our imagination." (Peter Cheeseman, "On Finding the Most Probable Model", 1990)
"The use of Occam’s razor, along with the related critical, skeptical view toward any speculations about the unknown, is perhaps the most misunderstood aspect of the scientific method. People confuse doubt with denial. Science doesn’t deny anything, but it doubts everything not required by the data. Note, however, that doubt does not necessarily mean rejection, just an attitude of disbelief that can be changed when the facts require it." (Victor J Stenger, "Physics and Psychics: The Search for a World Beyond the Senses", 1990)
"We live in an era when it seems legitimate to try everything conceivable within the known laws of physics, particularly in the absence of data." (Geoffrey Burbridge, "Focal Point", Sky and Telescope Vol. 78 (6), 1990)
"What about confusing clutter? Information overload? Doesn't data have to be ‘boiled down’ and ‘simplified’? These common questions miss the point, for the quantity of detail is an issue completely separate from the difficulty of reading. Clutter and confusion are failures of design, not attributes of information." (Edward R Tufte, "Envisioning Information", 1990)
"Data without generalization is just gossip." (Robert M Pirsig, "Lila: An Inquiry into Morals", 1991)
"Much of the technical literature is difficult to read, even for scientists and engineers. Even the best books tend to dwell on the mathematical models and don’t give the slightest hint what to do if one is lucky enough to have some data." (Foster Morrison, "The Art of Modeling Dynamic Systems: Forecasting for Chaos, Randomness & Determinism", 1991)
"Statistics is a very powerful and persuasive mathematical tool. People put a lot of faith in printed numbers. It seems when a situation is described by assigning it a numerical value, the validity of the report increases in the mind of the viewer. It is the statistician's obligation to be aware that data in the eyes of the uninformed or poor data in the eyes of the naive viewer can be as deceptive as any falsehoods." (Theoni Pappas, "More Joy of Mathematics: Exploring mathematical insights & concepts", 1991)
"A fundamental difference between religious and scientific thought is that the received beliefs in religion are ultimately based on revelations or pronouncements, usually by some long dead prophet or priest.[...] Dogma is interpreted by a caste of priests and is accepted by the multitude on faith or under duress. In contrast, the statements of science are derived from the data of observations and experiment, and from the manipulation of these data according to logical and often mathematical procedures." (John A Moore, "Science as a Way of Knowing: The Foundations of Modern Biology", 1993)
"[…] an honest exploratory study should indicate how many comparisons were made […] most experts agree that large numbers of comparisons will produce apparently statistically significant findings that are actually due to chance. The data torturer will act as if every positive result confirmed a major hypothesis. The honest investigator will limit the study to focused questions, all of which make biologic sense. The cautious reader should look at the number of ‘significant’ results in the context of how many comparisons were made." (James L Mills, "Data torturing", New England Journal of Medicine, 1993)
"Science demands a tolerance for ambiguity. Where we are ignorant, we withhold belief. Whatever annoyance the uncertainty engenders serves a higher purpose: It drives us to accumulate better data. This attitude is the difference between science and so much else. Science offers little in the way of cheap thrills. The standards of evidence are strict. But when followed they allow us to see far, illuminating even a great darkness." (Carl Sagan, "Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space", 1994)
"Science is not impressed with a conglomeration of data. It likes carefully constructed analysis of each problem." (Daniel E Koshland Jr, Science, Volume 263 (5144), [editorial] 1994)
"We do not realize how deeply our starting assumptions affect the way we go about looking for and interpreting the data we collect." (Roger A Lewin, "Kanzi: The Ape at the Brink of the Human Mind", 1994)
"When looking at the end result of any statistical analysis, one must be very cautious not to over interpret the data. Care must be taken to know the size of the sample, and to be certain the method for gathering information is consistent with other samples gathered. […] No one should ever base conclusions without knowing the size of the sample and how random a sample it was. But all too often such data is not mentioned when the statistics are given - perhaps it is overlooked or even intentionally omitted." (Theoni Pappas, "More Joy of Mathematics: Exploring mathematical insights & concepts", 1994)
"Intuition is the art, peculiar to the human mind, of working out the correct answer from data that is, in itself, incomplete or even, perhaps, misleading." (Isaac Asimov, "Forward the Foundation", 1993)
"Having a scientific outlook means being willing to divest yourself of a pet hypothesis, whether it relates to easy self-help improvements, homeopathy, graphology, spontaneous generation, or any other concept, when the data produced by a carefully designed experiment contradict that hypothesis. Retaining a belief in a hypothesis that cannot be supported by data is the hallmark of both the pseudoscientist and the fanatic. Often the more deeply held the hypothesis, the more reactionary is the response to nonsupportive data." (Michael Zimmerman, "Science, Nonscience, and Nonsense: Approaching Environmental Literacy", 1995)
No comments:
Post a Comment