Return-Path: sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 20 Feb 93 13:20:13 -0800 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odq -oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fsocgrad-relay socgrad-list Sat, 20 Feb 93 21:19:53 GMT for SOCGRAD%@SDSC; Sat, 20 Feb 1993 21:19 GMT Date: Sat, 20 Feb 93 16:19 EST From: UPAMMP%UNC.BITNET@Sdsc.Edu To: socgrad%UCSD.EDU@Sdsc.Edu Subject: (Copy) statistics ---------------------------- Text of forwarded message ----------------------- From: UPAMMP@UNC.BITNET To: JEPSTEIN%KentVM.Kent.edu%UCSD@SDSC.BITNET Subject: snide remarks CC: socgrad%UCSD.EDU@SDSC.BITNET by making flippent comments about statistics you are not furthering the debate and only infuriating people who read your messages. a cute comment like, "society is not a bell-shaped curve" and "reality does not follow a normal distribution" can be responded to by another cute comment such as, "if you get enough of it, reality does follow a normal distribution!" where does such drivel get us? I'm with Habermas in believing rational- critical debate to be best and I would prefer to discuss the differences in sociological research in more reasonable terms. I am not inclined to listen to your points about your perspective when you are making annoying (although witty) remarks. It sounds like you have already decided that any approach to sociology that involves numbers is illegimate. It also sounds, however, that you have not learned a great deal about statistics before discounting it out of hand. Just as the response to Kent Green about philosophy charged him with discounting philosophy when he does not know enough about 20th century thought, I charge you with dismissing statistics (in a very irritating manner) without first fully checking it out. I would really like to continue this debate because I see a great deal of merit in many approaches to social issues. However, I hope that I no longer have to wince in anticipation of new anger every time I see your name on my incoming mail list. Finally, I must say that when I joined this network, thought that it was to be a place where grad students exchanged ideas and offered mutual support and advice. Although I am happy that debates on interesting topics have been brought up, I think beating each other up on issues that have been around forever instead of listening to other opinions is fruitless. I would like to hear why some people consider philosophy of vital importance to sociology. I would like to LISTEN and attempt to UNDERSTAND though. I do not want to argue simply to get practice. I have a different perspective from some sociologists. I would hope that my perspective would be considered also, however and that everyone would attempt to THINK about other people's opinions and make this whole thing a LEARNING experience. Otherwise, I don't think we have gotton one of the major points of Sociology.