At 10:43 PM 5/12/2005 -0500, Dan M. wrote: >> Then again, you recently offered to compare economic growth >> during the Great Depression to that of World War II...... so I'm not sure >> what you are thinking here. > >I'm thinking data are. We should fit theory to data, not pidgen hole data >into what we already know is true.
So, proposing absurd tests, like comparing economic growth during the Great Depression to economic growth during World War II is "fitting theory to data"??? To me it smacks of doing precisely the opposite, pigeon-holing the data to support what you already know to be true. That's the danger of baiting of people with proposed tests of validity when you already know the results of those tests - we can reasonably assume that you would not be proposing those tests if they directly contradicted your positions. >The time frame is a bit ambiguous, but I think that it is reasonable to >assume that people consider the biggest changes of the last couple of years >when they answer this. If most people thought the country was going in >the wrong direction, then it would be hard to say that people consider >things a lot better. I disagree. If the results of the survey had not supported my proposition, would it have been reasonable to assume that things are worse in Iraq than under Saddam Hussein? Or reasonable to assume that things are worse in Iraq than at some intermediate point in the past? I would think the latter. In fact, I think that is exactly what we see in comparing the poll following the formation of the new Iraqi government with the poll during the assault on Fallujah. Thus, even though the data arguably supports my position, I don't think that it is valid. JDG _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
