送交者: psycho 于 2005-11-30, 14:16:43:
回答: 文理相轻何时休 由 yige 于 2005-11-30, 13:49:07:
--pulling your own legs in the argument.
Many people here are arguing WenKes are more passionate than rigorous--and they think this is a shortcoming. However, this itself is a stereotype.
Quoted from 良忠:"不涉及人，就单将理科和文科相比，
前者对逻辑自洽、多方面证据支持、现象的可重复性、足够的统计数据、无漏洞
的实验设计等诸项要求是文科无法比拟的。"--This is plain wrong. In humanities (besides creative writing), logic consistency (though in human language rather than in math, but math is also a language, in the sense of communicating means) and evidence are as important as in science/engineering. As for replicability of phenomenom, enough statistics, and experiemental designs, the research methods of humanity is limited by its scope of research, e.g. you can not "design" history, and the important events in history are not numerious enough to make any statistics meaningful--if someone disregard this lack of variation (statistics is just for getting information from variations) and have to apply statistics in humanities research, this is where the real stupidity is, this is where disrespect of scholastic standard is. Like a phycist laughing a pre-gene medical scientist for their less precision in measuring and experiments, this is meaningless.
A person who can not really distinguish the limitatin of scholastic value of a subject, and the limitation of the research methods of a subject because its scope, is not that good in logic.