Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Heinz Blasnik- Views You Can Use -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (1231)	5/14/2003 10:23:10 AM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4916

< I don't agree with you that disproving the "flaws" on assumptions on which an argument is based is necessarily "getting stuck" etc. > 1.) No it's rarely flaws in assumptions of the main argument, that was my point. She does often change the subject to something more to her liking however. 2.) No, it wouldn't NECESSARILY have to be getting stuck... IMO she does. <It's the sign of a mathematical mindset. > You have to know when to use it [as you know]... the scientific method used on irrelevant material yeilds the same. <What you call "picking small flaws" is, most probably, actually undermining your whole argument. > I'm well aware of the scientific method, as well as it's many shortcomings in the social sciences.... your use of 'most probably' without extensive data is questionable for instance. Then again, perhaps you've followed this and other boards for quite some time, I don't know. In any case what is 'scientific proof' in the realm of economics we could fit in a tea cup... we're all trying to divine the future and make money no? Or of course you may just see it differently. It's all simply MO of course. DAK

To: zonder who wrote (1231)	5/14/2003 12:05:00 PM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4916

This is scientific methodology - i.e. if the assumptions are false, then the conclusions don't stand a chance. Actually, you can’t conclude that the conclusion is false just because the assumptions are flawed. All you can say is that the conclusion does not follow from the assumptions. Plenty of scientific papers have flawed presentations, but correct conclusions – mostly because the author started with an observation and fit the theory. It’s rare to find sound theory. Sound meaning a correct conclusion that does follow, necessarily, from the assumptions.