Pearl jewelry for bridal and wedding tradition, bridal pearl necklace set for wedding ceremony, pearl jewelry for graduation and wedding celebration
Thursday, February 28, 2019
Perfect Wedding Shell Pearls Pendant Necklace & Earrings by FashionJewel...
1 comment:
Anonymous
said...
Questions of the second type "what flowers do You love?" are translated with the need for a series of questions of the first type "do You like roses?" (Yes, no), "do You like carnations?" (Yes, no), etc. the only Difference is that in the first case, the question of the second type contains a single concept, the amount of which is not divided, in other words, only one person can be the discoverer of America. In the second case, the concept of "love flowers" contains infinitely many podpisati. These two types of question, though often in highly modified form, depending on the particular conversational situation, we use in natural language. Often, mostly in the form of a preference for the first or second type of question. So, the correspondents during the interviews often use questions of the first type, transforming them into suggestive and requiring only a positive response: "Tell me, do You have enough money for the development of his farm?" or "In Your village there live people of different nationalities. They live very amicably, isn't it?" Respondents have nothing else to do but confirm the opinion of a pushy journalist. Investigators also often use dichotomous questions, but their questions represent a logical chain of dependencies of the responses of the respondents. This so-called Socratic method when confirming the reply and confirming response B mandatory gives you the answer and, consequently, lead by logical reasoning to the true desired response, or at least force the Respondent to accept a deviation from a logical chain of reasoning and thus they were wrong. And it's not sophistical tricks. Questions and answers followed in a certain order, there is only a reflection of the logic of the events actually taking place. Asked questions and get the answers reproduce the logic of events in the logic of thinking. In scientific studies often use the second type of question that allows us to develop dialogue and to simulate the development of truth. Using the output knowledge, which only operates on questions of the first type, scientists will arrive at some desired knowledge, but necessarily hypothetical, because it is not yet tested in practice. That is to say, predictive knowledge. And the longer the chain of deductive reasoning, the lower the probability of obtaining true knowledge. Sociologists in the questionnaires as well use these two types of questions, and in this respect sociology is no exception, anything new she came up with. However, the formal interpretation of these two issues in sociological research has been very peculiar, which was dictated by the specifics of the question-answering relations of the sociologist and the Respondent through the questionnaire and the specifics of the system of examination. Features of question-answer relations are explained primarily by the fact that in the sociological questionnaire, the context of the question, and therefore its content, most often presented in the form of a special set of alternatives. It determines the form of its construction. For example:
1 comment:
Questions of the second type "what flowers do You love?" are translated with the need for a series of questions of the first type "do You like roses?" (Yes, no), "do You like carnations?" (Yes, no), etc. the only Difference is that in the first case, the question of the second type contains a single concept, the amount of which is not divided, in other words, only one person can be the discoverer of America. In the second case, the concept of "love flowers" contains infinitely many podpisati.
These two types of question, though often in highly modified form, depending on the particular conversational situation, we use in natural language. Often, mostly in the form of a preference for the first or second type of question. So, the correspondents during the interviews often use questions of the first type, transforming them into suggestive and requiring only a positive response: "Tell me, do You have enough money for the development of his farm?" or "In Your village there live people of different nationalities. They live very amicably, isn't it?" Respondents have nothing else to do but confirm the opinion of a pushy journalist.
Investigators also often use dichotomous questions, but their questions represent a logical chain of dependencies of the responses of the respondents. This so-called Socratic method when confirming the reply and confirming response B mandatory gives you the answer and, consequently, lead by logical reasoning to the true desired response, or at least force the Respondent to accept a deviation from a logical chain of reasoning and thus they were wrong. And it's not sophistical tricks. Questions and answers followed in a certain order, there is only a reflection of the logic of the events actually taking place. Asked questions and get the answers reproduce the logic of events in the logic of thinking.
In scientific studies often use the second type of question that allows us to develop dialogue and to simulate the development of truth. Using the output knowledge, which only operates on questions of the first type, scientists will arrive at some desired knowledge, but necessarily hypothetical, because it is not yet tested in practice. That is to say, predictive knowledge. And the longer the chain of deductive reasoning, the lower the probability of obtaining true knowledge.
Sociologists in the questionnaires as well use these two types of questions, and in this respect sociology is no exception, anything new she came up with. However, the formal interpretation of these two issues in sociological research has been very peculiar, which was dictated by the specifics of the question-answering relations of the sociologist and the Respondent through the questionnaire and the specifics of the system of examination.
Features of question-answer relations are explained primarily by the fact that in the sociological questionnaire, the context of the question, and therefore its content, most often presented in the form of a special set of alternatives. It determines the form of its construction. For example:
Post a Comment