Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 5731378" data-attributes="member: 177">In terms of logic, I have not only demonstrated it, but outright proven it.  "Any data is better than..." is an absolute statement. All I have to do is present a single counter-example to disprove it.  I have done so.  But, let me make it even more clear:You want to know the average temperature in August on the National Mall in Washington DC - you assume it will be hot, but you want to know more accurately and precisely than that..  You take two measurements: on the first and last day, and average them.  Your thermometer is broken, and your data says it was -20 degrees Celsius.  There you go - a single counter-example, in which data is not better than assumption.  QED.  Now, you can argue that your particular data is better than a particular assumption - and that's fine.  I encourage that, because that's sound intellectual process.  But I don't accept "any data..." as a valid argument.  Nobody should, because it simply isn't true.  Like life, a datum unexamined is not worth having.I can't tell if you are missing my point, or misrepresenting it.I will say, again, because it had no apparent impact earlier - I do not argue that assumption is always better than data.  Nor do I argue that data tells you nothing at all.  I argue that you cannot assume that because it is "data", that it is better than assumption.  It isn't as if they didn't examine data from Venera 4 - they were quite aware that, under those conditions instruments could (in fact, were certain to eventually) fail, or give anomalous readings.  Given that examination, the data from Venera 4 is not just "any data" - it is data of known pedigree and well-stated limitations.  And even then, no responsible researcher takes the data from Venera 4, and extrapolates long-term averages from it alone.  Yes.  But note that I take an aggressive stance against the data, not against Pathfinder.  There's a big difference.  I think Pathfinder is an okay game. I think 4e is an okay game.  I own books for both, and I'll play either, and have a good time.You were the one who said, "any data is better..."  That's false, so I took issue with the point.  If the other guy had said it, I'd have taken it up with him.  I take issue with folks who act as if ICV2 and Amazon sales "data", because it is shoddy data, not because I care whether WOtC or Paizo is ahead.  Heck, recently on these boards, I took issue with representation of data that supported a position I happen to believe is true (that Americans should get out of their chairs and exercise more). It isn't about Paizo and WotC, for me.  It is about critical thinking and how to use data properly, in general.  Yes.  And that question has to be asked.  It should not be taken for granted that the data in hand is better, or you are just as guilty of making assumptions as the other guy.</blockquote>

Verification