13-08-2017, 09:28 AM
I don't really have anything against the theories / hypotheses in group 1.
They come in all levels of maturity.
They're not necessarily mutually exclusive, and allow for a lot of lively discussion.
I've seen plenty of new insights, or confirmations of old insights.
Some of them may well be correct, but for most (I would argue) it is impossible to say either way.
I don't think it is wrong to work on the basis of theories or hypotheses.
Even assumptions.
This is as long as one stays critical, and keeps in mind what they are.
The problem (in all three groups) is when theories get a life of their own.
When they become convictions.
The worst that can happen is if one gets to the point where evidence is considered or rejected, not on the basis of its quality/reliability, but on the basis whether it fits with the theory or not.
This seems obvious, but it is a quite natural initial reaction, and even not always fully consciously.
One may also encounter arguments that are demonstrably incorrect. (And not just a matter of opinion).
This can be tricky, because it is not always clear that the person making these statements is aware of the incorrectness.
They come in all levels of maturity.
They're not necessarily mutually exclusive, and allow for a lot of lively discussion.
I've seen plenty of new insights, or confirmations of old insights.
Some of them may well be correct, but for most (I would argue) it is impossible to say either way.
I don't think it is wrong to work on the basis of theories or hypotheses.
Even assumptions.
This is as long as one stays critical, and keeps in mind what they are.
The problem (in all three groups) is when theories get a life of their own.
When they become convictions.
The worst that can happen is if one gets to the point where evidence is considered or rejected, not on the basis of its quality/reliability, but on the basis whether it fits with the theory or not.
This seems obvious, but it is a quite natural initial reaction, and even not always fully consciously.
One may also encounter arguments that are demonstrably incorrect. (And not just a matter of opinion).
This can be tricky, because it is not always clear that the person making these statements is aware of the incorrectness.