Re: [Leica] (Help... I've fallen and cant get up!)

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

Am I the only one that thinks this stuff belongs somewhere else?

Jim

At 11:34 PM 7/13/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Eric Welch:
>
>Re:  1.  Statistical Significance and 2,  Control in examination of
>photography and values.
>
>1.  We will not achieve statistical significance because we will knowingly
>violate the assumptions of the parametric T-Test and F-Test (statistical
>models) (e.g., assumption of random sampling is violated).   Statistical
>significance is important here.  One may violate the assumptions of a
>statistical model providing one is up front and declares openly what one is
>doing.  Heuristic assessments and serendipidity are as imporant as scientific
>methodology.  Statistics is a product of natural science.  My work embodies a
>second science, a new science we call Value Science.  The co-play and
counter-
>play of the two forms Unified Science and so I work in a world of three
>sciences.
>
>2.  Control Group:  College Students reflecting the normative value vision in
>our culture. 
>
>      (Note:  The valuemetric procedure I use is based on a formal theory of
>value whose hypotheses have been validated empirically by me over the years.
>This is not a psychological test procedure, and its construction follows none
>of the criteria of test construction promoted by psychology or psychiatry.
 It
>is a new approach to values researach and goes beyond the behavioral
sciences:
>See:  Edwards and Davis, Editors,  "Forms of Value and Valuation"; University
>Press of America, 1991. )
>
>Leon
>LP6@aol.com
>Axiology6@aol.com
>