19th March 2010, 05:24 PM
mididoctors Wrote:well you have hit the proverbial nail on the head because the facts vs truth or evidence and debate is built in
we both agree
secondly we both agree that assumptions are brought to process
would you agree these unstated assumptions need to be highlighted and questioned? flagged up?
or should they be left alone?
the problem is these unstated assumptions also include assumptions about how the data should be analysed (which is where the context sub context part comes in but leave that for latter where an easy to understand real world example will be presented)
for now do you agree?
think about it for an hour or so I have to do something
this is not a discussion i can make my point in one post without steering you through a path where you understand what it is I am trying to say... if you did you would have it from the first post.... thats just the nature of communication.
its not some sort of attack
Where would you start with flagging up in built assumptions? We are all human and therefore subject to the same sort of prejudices and assumptions, what would count and what wouldn't? Would the process of identifying existing assumptions not also be subject to them, and on and on and on. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it unless something was patently wrong (i.e. there was plenty of evidence that it was wrong and a broad consensus of opinion, which is about all you can hope for).
I'm not sure what 'context sub context' means so you will have to explain that one to me.
In an hour I will be at home!