Learn to create jobs based on real, complete and demonstrable data.
The elaboration of an academic work entails the application of a scientific methodology throughout the process.
We highlight some of the errors and fallacies that often contain poorly developed and incomplete theses.
Subjectivity and lack of focus can invalidate research and discredit our professionalism.
The University, regardless of your career or area of knowledge, is higher education based on the acquisition and development of scientific methodology. And what does this mean?
It is the basis that all graduates must achieve and put into practice in their academic work and in the development of a thesis. Moreover, it is the pillar on which the creation and defense of any research and new hypothesis studied are based.
It is about the student, like a scientist, being a professional capable of handling data, observing them, questioning them and developing different ways of using them. In short, to reduce the subjective effect on academic and professional development.
Without putting these diverse methodologies into practice, we run the risk of falling into the error of developing works based on fallacies and of null value. An academic work will not be useful if it is done with untested data and if time and effort have not been invested in analyzing SSC result 2018.
To avoid this, we summarize 3 types of fallacies or worthless arguments that you should NOT use in the presentation of thesis or academic work:
- Suppression of evidence
It is a bad start and a very common practice in most studies and reports that are carried out.
It consists of making a preliminary selection only of the facts and facts that support our argument and that serve as justification for the defense of our idea. Therefore, the data that question or dismantle it are excluded.
They are usually common in studies that collect temporary data, for years or periods of time.
What is really achieved is to create an affirmation with scarce information and collect data in a subjective and exclusive manner.
- Cause-effect relationships without base
It is rare in the scientific methodology, but very recurrent in the assembly of arguments in political and journalistic areas, but the symptom of lack of professionalism and scarce domain of sources and knowledge.
It is based on the creation of false causal relationships, resorting to false myths or controversial ideas with which it is easy to manipulate the opinion of mass society.
It is very useful to put it into practice in forums and debates, always avoiding creating relationships of facts and effects at the whim of the opinion and from a very subjective approach.
- Confirmation prejudice
It is the tendency to interpret information in a way that benefits our hypothesis.
It is based on observations and biased statements without a thorough and complete analytical basis. Therefore, they can be easy to demonstrate and show as erroneous and poorly stated hypotheses.
Basically, it is about discarding the experiments or data that do not favor our work and with it, continuing with a misinterpretation of the evidence.
Remember well these errors of approach and reinforces your hypothesis, applying an analytical methodology and very exhaustive with the data handled.