« Back to main site AECB logo the sustainable building association
Welcome, Guest. Not sure where to start? Click here for a short introduction. Otherwise Please login or register.
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News: The Notify button enables registered members to subscribe to email notification of replies to topics in this board

+  AECB Forum
|-+  Eco-Building Opinion
| |-+  Rants and raves
| | |-+  Data
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Data  (Read 6198 times)
Nick Grant
AECBmember

Posts: 1274



View Profile WWW
« on: June 14, 2007, 08:53:21 AM »

I just stumbled across a nice piece written by the Chair in Complementary Medicine at Exeter Uni that rang some bells. A lot of us came to green building from an alternative background and rather than say more I'll just post this link as i think there are some striking parallels  and it made me laugh in an uncomfortable way.

http://www.dcscience.net/quack.html#ernst01


The link just goes to a long blog so I have pasted the text here:

This article was written by Edzard Ernst, professor of Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter, in Focus on Alternative and Complementary Medicine (FACT), Volume 6 (2) June 2001 101

In praise of the data-free discussion. Towards a new paradigm

Edzard Ernst
Editor-in-Chief of FACT and Chair in Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter, 25 Victoria Park Road, Exeter EX2 4NT, UK.
Eight years ago, when I decided to go full-time into complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) research, I was a narrow-minded and short-sighted man! Narrow-minded because I had been under the impression that data are an essential element in any scientific debate and short-sighted because I failed to realise how efficiently one can expand one's mind if only one manages to overcome science's obsessional insistence with data, facts and evidence. Today, after attending about 300 conferences on CAM, I have learned an important lesson and realised the true value and enlightened bliss of data-free discussions, meetings and other debates.

Their advantages are multifold. First, they are far less tedious. Under the old paradigm, one had to prepare, research, read and study for every presentation. Some speakers had to spend days, even weeks or months preparing a single lecture. The new CAM paradigm has made this so much easier. No more time-wasting preparatory work; one can now walk straight into the middle of the action and be part of it. The time thus saved allows one to extend one's scope of topics almost ad infinitum and to attend even more meetings and data-free discussions for the benefit of everyone.

Second, data can be frightfully intimidating and non-egalitarian. In the past, those with knowledge had a distinct advantage over those without. Under the data-free paradigm, all can join in and all are equal The less you are aware of the facts, the more light-heartedly you can go to work. Data are ever so patronising; they weigh you down and limit your freedom. Data-free debates, in contrast, can be such liberating fun!

Third, data do get in the way of our real aims in life. Data-free meetings are much more practical if you really want to achieve something quickly. All you need to do is to invite speakers who vaguely agree with your own views, let them talk at length and finally reach a groundbreaking, barrier-crashing consensus. If you want to be absolutely sure to succeed, invite a few VIPs to nod their wise heads along the way. Who on earth would dare to disagree with a consensus? Data-free discussion can be immensely productive.

Fourth, under the old paradigm, one set of data often opposed another set. Unavoidably, controversy ensued, people became emotional and in the end someone got hurt. Not so with data-free events! Where there are no data, there can be no disagreement. Here is the energy that will truly heal the medicine for the New Millennium. Data-free discussions provide the true basis for ubiquitous peace, love and happiness.

I, for one, am convinced -the bad old times when scientific meetings focused on data and evidence must be over once and for all. This is particularly true for CAM. The last thing we want is the slaying of our beautiful hypotheses by some nasty, ugly facts.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2007, 10:18:21 AM by Nick Grant » Logged
Peter Wilkinson
AECBmember

Posts: 142


Architecture: Construction : Renewables


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2007, 12:40:33 PM »

OK Nick, I'll kick it off.

Living in a dream world is bliss. But replacing facts with free thinking consensus is simply dangerous, even anarchic. It's based on the thoery that we would all agree, which we don't (thankfully).

Half of me agrees with the notion of too much data and analysis of data to the endth degree is teadious. I'd much rather to go out and do something to proove to my self that it's a good idea, than spend many hours researching, modeling & calculating. But I do research and calculate to some extent prior to doing to reduce the failure rate and inevitable cost of misguided mistakes. And trial and error is data gathering but not many are willing to pay for trial and error without redress when it goes wrong. Assuming that ones ideas is not enough, especially when peoples lives are at stake. Ancient builders often built using trial and error. If it failed they learnt and adapted but then they didn't get sued. And a few dead peasants wasn't going to stop them.

So it's a great idea in theory but in reality we need data. The key is knowing which data to rely on!! Wink
Logged

Peter Wilkinson
Nick Grant
AECBmember

Posts: 1274



View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2007, 06:05:54 PM »

Peter

You might have missed the irony!!! Read it again!

Nick
Logged
Tahir

Posts: 576


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2007, 11:39:27 AM »

Steel's irony isn't it?
Logged
Peter Wilkinson
AECBmember

Posts: 142


Architecture: Construction : Renewables


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2007, 03:59:50 PM »

Nick

The irony wasn't lost on me.

It's funny how, out of such a mad concept one could actually agree with the idea of a general consenses in place of hard facts to move things on. When you think of the many achievements of man, many are made by stumbling across things, in error, or even  thinking of an idea and going away and trying it. Too many times individuals are discouraged to 'have a go', try out an idea and see if it works.

Instead we are encouraged to sit down and discuss for hours if not days how to do some thing but never actually get on and do it. Institutions want facts & figures (data) to mitigate risks.

Bring on the mavricks, the wild eccentrics. We may yet all be riding around in Sinclare C5's or what ever they were called.

Read a lot of Edward De-Bono. He encourages different ways of problem solving, thought processes, that move away from the socratic, Western approach. There's method in the madness.

Have a room full of energy consultants and you bet that on the general principles, they'll agree. But when they talk about the detail, methodology and general number cruching, they'll fall out in lumps.
Logged

Peter Wilkinson
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
naughty-teens