Sætra Henrik Skaug
Faculty of Business, Languages, and Social Science, Østfold University College, Remmen, 1757, Halden, Norway.
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2018 Dec;52(4):508-522. doi: 10.1007/s12124-018-9447-5.
We now live in the era of big data, and according to its proponents, big data is poised to change science as we know it. Claims of having no theory and no ideology are made, and there is an assumption that the results of big data are trustworthy because it is considered free from human judgement, which is often considered inextricably linked with human error. These two claims lead to the idea that big data is the source of better scientific knowledge, through more objectivity, more data, and better analysis. In this paper I analyse the philosophy of science behind big data and make the claim that the death of many traditional sciences, and the human scientist, is much exaggerated. The philosophy of science of big data means that there are certain things big data does very well, and some things that it cannot do. I argue that humans will still be needed for mediating and creating theory, and for providing the legitimacy and values science needs as a normative social enterprise.
我们现在生活在大数据时代，其支持者认为，大数据必将改变我们所熟知的科学。有人宣称大数据没有理论和意识形态，并且假定大数据的结果是可信的，因为它被认为不受人为判断的影响，而人为判断往往被视为与人为错误有着千丝万缕的联系。这两种说法导致了这样一种观点，即大数据通过更高的客观性、更多的数据和更好的分析，是更好的科学知识的来源。在本文中，我分析了大数据背后的科学哲学，并认为许多传统科学以及人类科学家的消亡被夸大了很多。大数据的科学哲学意味着大数据在某些方面做得非常好，而在某些方面则做不到。我认为，在调解和创建理论，以及为科学作为一种规范性社会事业提供所需的合法性和价值观方面，仍然需要人类。
