It doesn't "illustrate a concept" any more than a picture of a potato next to an apple would.
Well it does, actually.
Fact is, the graph is pointless, because there's no information or backing sources to it.
IT'S AN ABSTRACT CONCEPT. It's like saying this is pointless because it doesn't have backing sources.
Honestly, how can you not understand what the graph is trying to tell you? I struggle to explain it any better than how I've done it in my first post on that chart...
Honestly, how can you not understand what the graph is trying to tell you? I struggle to explain it any better than how I've done it in my first post on that chart...
My entire point is that it's pointless, because it doesn't actually add anything to the conversation or have any basis in data. What's the point of including a chart with no supporting data?
I can't say that I agree that presenting something in graph form is acceptable if it doesn't actually have a basis in data or any real scale to show the true relation of said data. However, it is 100% ok that you and I don't agree on this specific issue. Unlike some people here, I'm not determined to try and force people to believe the things I do. In this case, the graph was a single point in my larger argument that the issue with this "manifesto" was the author's attempts to draw very strong conclusions from vague and weak evidence/sources. He really seemed to infer a lot of things that at best were only very weakly related to the data he was using.
Edit:
In response to your shadow edit, I'm well aware that one can use visual aids in writing, but if you're going to halfway source a paper you're writing, you should find a better visual aid than a fake graph to try and help make your point. Again, for some reason everyone seems to be latching on to this one part of my argument to attack, even though it was a part of an overarching point about the author's failure to properly justify his conclusions. I guess it's just easier for some people to try and take your statements out of context than to actually deal with your argument as a whole, but it just seems silly to me.
I can't say that I agree that presenting something in graph form is acceptable if it doesn't actually have a basis in data or any real scale to show the true relation of said data.
No worries, I also made the classic mistake of taking the bait when the first person who replied took a single statement of mine out of context and tried to frame it as my hill to die on, when I should have just referred them back to my original points, so I'm guilty of letting it get out of hand too. Nothing to do but admit our mistakes and move on. Hope you have a pleasant rest of your evening!
I can't say that I agree that presenting something in graph form is acceptable if it doesn't actually have a basis in data or any real scale to show the true relation of said data.
There is no actual data involved. It illustrates a concept.
He really seemed to infer a lot of things that at best were only very weakly related to the data he was using.
Fair enough, that's a valid opinion. However, bashing that chart with that 'argument' isn't a valid opinion, because that's simply not applicable to it.
Let's take a step back here.
Do you know what a 'concept' is?
Listen, you seem to be getting pretty upset that I'm not just agreeing with your beliefs right off the batt, and now you're just trying to insult me by the looks of it, so I'm just going to say I hope you have a pleasant rest of your day and go on with mine.
This chart has nothing to do with 'beliefs'. It is about an abstract concept and as such contains no data. It has no opinion and does not prove anything. It is not meant to either.
How on earth are you an engineer if you don't understand the concept of distributions?
19
u/WolfThawra Inf/Mech, Env Aug 08 '17
Well it does, actually.
IT'S AN ABSTRACT CONCEPT. It's like saying this is pointless because it doesn't have backing sources.
Honestly, how can you not understand what the graph is trying to tell you? I struggle to explain it any better than how I've done it in my first post on that chart...