|View single post by JoanieReb|
|Posted: Mon Dec 17th, 2007 11:10 pm||
|"Occam's razor strikes again. Not all arguments need to be convoluted."
OK. However, one of the first things that was drilled into me during my graduate
studies was: All data must be recognized and accounted for. One cannot set
aside data that one does not like, or arbitrarily dismiss it as anomaly. If data
conflicts with one's theory and cannot be acceptably reconciled, one's theory
must either be expanded to explain the data or dismissed altogether.
So, while one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of
entities required to explain anything, one must recognized all pertinent entities.
(Again, Great thread Y'All! And, building so fast that I can barely keep up....)
Last edited on Tue Dec 18th, 2007 01:40 am by JoanieReb