Discuss The Portions Or Proposals Of This Chapter You A ✓ Solved

Discuss The Portions Or Proposals Of This Chapter That You Agree And D

Discuss the portions or proposals of this chapter that you agree and disagree with. Please post your ideas below (1) and reply to two (2) other comments in order to participate in the online discussion. Total will be one page around, the two replies of comments can be few sentences. Potential discussion points: Chapter 1: Name some theories, from any area of life or study, and articulate what makes them a “theory." What does it mean to be a theory compared to an idea, hypothesis, or belief? Other metaphors for theory? (e.g., a cooking pan, etc.) Chapter 1 Lecture: HIMYM The Dobler-Dahmer Theory: Big Bang Theory Penny Solved String Theory: Two comments need to reply: 1. I have previous knowledge on the "Social Exchange Theory" I have seen it exemplified in many movies. What I know about this theory, is it revolves around the cost of an action, followed by the reward or the outcome of that action. An example of this would be, if a boy asked a girl on a date (the action) the girl responds with yes (the reward). I understand that this is a theory because 1. the message is being analyzed by others, 2. there was a creation of messages being delivered, 3. the message was interpreted, 4. there was a response delivered back to the communicator. This theory is similar to a hypothesis because the prediction of the outcome could have been different. For example, if the girl chose to decline his offer to go on a date. 2. My definition of theory is something that is believed to have happened. I am curious though, is it the same thing as an opinion? A theory does not necessarily have a right answer. I would compare it more to an assumption. For example, there is a theory that Katy Perry is JonBennet Ramsey because they look identical. JonBennet Ramsey was murdered 20 years ago and there is a theory that she did not really die and just gave up her original name for fame. In the book a metaphor for theories would be maps. because they like maps they help us understand unfamiliar places. #define DEBUG #include #include #include #include using namespace std; class Cell { bool m_occu; // unoccupied, shown '.' bool m_mark; // true -> circle 'o', false -> cross 'x' public: Cell() : m_occu(false), m_mark(false) {} void setMark(const bool h_or_c) {m_mark = h_or_c; m_occu = true;} bool isMarked() const { return m_occu;} bool isCircle() const { return m_occu && m_mark; } bool isCross() const { return m_occu && !m_mark; } friend ostream& operator > m_map; public: Board(){ vector a_row(3); for (int i = 0; i 2 && h_or_c) return true; } if(m_map[row][col].isCross()) { if(++cross > 2 && !h_or_c) return true; } } } for (int col = 0; col 2 && h_or_c) return true; } if(m_map[row][col].isCross()) { if(++cross > 2 && !h_or_c) return true; } } } circle = cross = 0; for(int row = 2, col = 0; row >= 3 && col 2 && h_or_c) return true; } if(m_map[row][col].isCross()) { if(++cross > 2 && !h_or_c) return true; } } return false; } friend ostream& operator> r >> c; b.setMark(true, r - 'A', c - '1'); //omit consistency check. if(b.isWon(true)) { cout vt; for(int row = 0; row

Sample Paper For Above instruction

The understanding of theories forms a fundamental aspect of academic discourse and intellectual inquiry. In this discussion, I will explore the components and significance of theories, identify some theories from diverse fields, analyze specific examples, and reflect upon their distinctions from hypotheses or beliefs. Furthermore, I will critically evaluate the proposals from the chapter, expressing areas of agreement and disagreement to deepen the understanding of what constitutes a valid scientific or conceptual theory.

To begin, a theory can be defined as a systematic explanation of phenomena based on evidence and logical reasoning. It serves as an overarching framework that rationalizes observations, predicts outcomes, and guides further research. Unlike ideas, which are often preliminary notions or personal opinions, or hypotheses, which are testable predictions, theories are comprehensive and supported by accumulated empirical data. For instance, in the realm of physics, Einstein's Theory of General Relativity provides a cohesive explanation of gravity, corroborated by experimental evidence. Theories often act as metaphors or models; for example, some compare theories to maps — tools that help navigate complex terrains of knowledge or physical reality, offering a simplified yet functional representation of systems.

From various disciplines, notable theories include the Social Exchange Theory in sociology, which posits that social relationships are maintained based on a cost-benefit analysis; String Theory in physics, which aims to unify fundamental forces; and the Dobler-Dahmer Theory from popular culture, which humorously suggests that certain behaviors are driven by underlying psychological motives. Each of these illustrates different frameworks for understanding behavior, interaction, or fundamental principles. For example, Social Exchange Theory explains interpersonal dynamics by weighing actions against expected rewards and costs, much like a transactional model in economics. It is supported by case studies and observational data, making it a well-established theory in social sciences.

I agree with many of the proposals presented in the chapter, particularly the emphasis on the importance of evidence and systematic structure in defining a theory. The comparison of theories to maps resonates well with my perspective because it highlights their role as guides to understanding complex systems. Additionally, the distinction between theories and hypotheses is crucial, as theories are broader constructs built on extensive evidence, whereas hypotheses are specific predictions that can be tested experimentally or observationally. However, I disagree with some simplified notions that equate theories solely with guesses or assumptions. While hypotheses may sometimes be mistaken, theories, especially scientific ones, are dynamic and subject to revision in light of new evidence. The notion of theories as static or unchangeable oversimplifies the iterative nature of scientific progress.

Concerning metaphors, I find the map analogy helpful but also limited, since it implies that theories are definitive representations of reality, whereas in science, theories are often provisional and open to falsification. The suggestion to consider theories as cooking pans, for example, is creative but less effective because it does not reflect the explanatory or predictive functions inherent in theories. Instead, metaphors that emphasize their evolving and revisable nature, such as scaffolds or lenses, might better capture the essence of theories in scientific inquiry.

In conclusion, the chapter's proposals align with my understanding that theories are structured, evidence-backed explanations that help us make sense of the world. I support the view that theories serve as navigational tools, like maps, guiding inquiry and understanding across disciplines. Nevertheless, I maintain that theories are dynamic, always subject to challenge and refinement, and should not be viewed as definitive representations but rather as evolving frameworks that adapt with new evidence and insights. This recognition affirms the importance of critical thinking and ongoing investigation in scholarly pursuits.

References

• Bunge, M. (2014). Philosophy of Science: From Problem to Theory. Routledge.
• Einstein, A. (1916). The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity. Annalen der Physik.
• Homans, G. C. (1958). Social Behavior as Exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597-606.
• Hossenfelder, S. (2018). Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray. Basic Books.
• Rosenberg, A. (2015). Philosophy of Science: A Contemporary Introduction. Routledge.
• Schwartz, B. (2004). The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. Harper Perennial.
• Seel, N. M. (2012). Metaphors in Science and Science Education. Science & Education, 21, 393-413.
• Thagard, P. (2012). The Place of Scientific Theories. Journal of Philosophy, 109(4), 175-198.
• Weinberg, S. (1992). Dreams of a Final Theory. Pantheon Books.
• Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. Vintage Books.