It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data

The arguer asserts that theorizing before one has data is a grave mistake and he might suggest that one should not theorize until has sufficient data. As far as I am concerned, there are two ways of cognition progress. One is that prepare and collect sufficient data first and then generalize a theory. Some kinds of experimental sciences such as biology belong to this way. Second is that propose a model first and then try to prove it with sufficient data or deduce from former theories. Some kinds of theoretic such as mathematics belong to this way. Therefore, I don’t agree with that it is always a grave mistake to theorize before one has data.

Data is the factual information used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation, so it is important in theorizing.

However, not all the great theories are based on accurate data when they are first originated. Actually, due to the logics, one might be able to theorize accurately before one has data. For example, the edifice of mathematics, actually based on the deduction and logical reasoning. Hypothesis is quite essential in theorization and plays an important role in acquiring data. Moreover, these theorizations are not merely fantasies as the speaker has claimed. Actually, they derive from the experience from the past and critical thinking, as well as insight. As time passing by, many conjectures and hypothesis are identified later. In the realm of natral science, it is possible for one to make educated guesses before one has data. Futher experimentation and evaluation of existing data will eventually prove or disprove the hypotheses.

Of course, theory is only convincing after being identified with data demonstration, which means that any substantiated theories must be eventually justified through rigorous data collecting.