Comments below.
--- Dick Fischer <dickfischer@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Bob wrote:
>
> >Please name one person who has not selected
> evidence to suit his or her own
> >theory and neglected or rejected evidence that does
> not. We all do.
>
> You are describing a lawyer's tactic, and a YEC
> tactic. I would hope that
> those of us who bear the "Christian label" are not
> picking and choosing
> what fits and what does not. If I knew where Jesus'
> bones were buried, I'd
> shout it from the roof tops. Any of us should.
> That's what separates us
> and safeguards our Christian message.
>
As both a laywer and a scientist, I think you have it
wrong. There are two ways, one more direct and one
indirect in which we selectively use data. First, the
rhetorical side -- rather than lawyerly -- is that we
use data to try and persuade others of things that we
believe. In so doing, you must select from the
universe of all possible data, which you cannot in
most instances relate in its entirety. Barring any
glaring knock down data that go against your position
(which as a lawyer you are ethically required to
provide to a court in say a legal brief -- although
you may try to explain it away), you will choose those
data that make your case more compelling. So, from a
persuasive standpoint, when you write an article, you
want to include the best data for your position, and
you might not necessarily either include all the data
against your position (impossible to do) or you may
explain why seemingly non-conforming data are either
inaccurate or really supportive (this is done all the
time).
The second way, of course, is indirect. Because you
have, say a particular theory in mind that explains
most of the data (or so you think), you are going to
tend to see the data in a more positive light to
support your position. You may be less familiar with
competing theories and the literature regarding them.
You may be more likely to see methodological problems
with experiments or studies that go against your
position, etc.
In either case, the motives are hardly sinister,
they tend to be how the world works, especially in
quasi-experimental disciplines like almost all the
social sciences, where data are even more
"interpretable" and methodology becomes even more
problematic.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 16 2002 - 09:35:37 EDT