Assumptions are not proven or necessarily true. You need to identify these so that you can identify results or conclusions derived from them as potentially untrue, but state that they are true based upon the assumption. You can for eg. base a paper upon an assumption, just so long as you identify that it is an assumption, not a truth.
2006-10-18 01:14:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by thelayla_scott 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Before you can carry on a logical conversation with someone you must know what the terms are that you agree on. These are the basic assumptions which you both agree are true.
This might be, for example, that Newton's laws of physics
hold true. Any conversation that we have about physics my basic assumption is that they hold true. Any calculation I show you whether right or wrong, the assumption is that Newton's laws hold. Now if you don't agree with my assumptions, then our debate would not be on the logic of my conclusions, rather on my core assumptions.
Mind you, many times in science the assumptions turn out to be wrong.
Even the assumption that Newton's laws hold is not always right
if you look at relativistic systems.
So make sure you know what the assumptions are before you debate any issue.
2006-10-18 08:19:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by True Blue 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
In debate it can bias your thinking and analysis of articles, evidence and opinions. In historical research your interpretation of the evidence may change depending on your underlying examples and in science your opinions as to which data points are "correct" and which ones are "errors" may change if you have an opinion as to what they should look like.
Example:
Broken wine bottles and dice are found in an acheological dig at a monestary.
Assumption "monks never gambled or drank alcohol"
Interpretation of evidence "visitors to the monestary brought wine to drink and gambled while staying"
Assumption "monks didn't really follow their claimed lifestle"
Interpretation of evidence "clearly the monks were gamblers and drank alcohol"
No assumption
Interpretation of evidence "some of the monks may have drank alcohol or gambled in defiance of regulations, however, visitors may have been responsible. Further investigation is necessary"
What you preconceptions are may change the perceived outcome.
Additionally in some statistical analysis of data, in a survey for example, whether you are trying to prove a statement as true or prove a statement as false changes the calculations. It is harder to prove something to be incorrect therefore to prove a theory you must analyse your data to disprove the opposite of you theory.
2006-10-18 08:11:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by Vanguard 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because assumptions lend themselves to bias, interpretation, and perspective.
If you can identify the assumption: you can overcome barriers to productivity, foregone conclusions, and narrowmindedness.
2006-10-18 08:16:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by Warrior 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are two kinds of people who have outrageously stupid beliefs -- those who can't think logically and those who do think logically, but base their arguments on false assumptions.
The first group are fools who are easily dismissed. The second group are very dangerous people who can destroy the world. Several of them are very high up in the US government as we speak.
2006-10-18 08:09:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ranto 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
it is not always important! as assumptions can create major problems. always clarify the situation by asking!
2006-10-18 08:02:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by apple 1
·
0⤊
0⤋