The Great Game, or, The Unending Competition Between Right Lobes and Left Lobes

What a wonderfully entertaining Asher/Lauer chapter--so full of bombast and verve.

Still, the nerd in me is, astonishingly, excited to conduct my first real survey, to organize and carry out my first actual random sampling. Even if, to my great disappointment, so much of it depends on first-rate skills in mathematics.

As for the other text, I can't help but be a tad annoyed; this competition of methodologies is really getting me down.

Can't anyone see that it's all nonsense?

The idea that this clash of research tactics will, eventually, lead to a clear winner, a victor perched atop the mangled pile of its fallen foes--there lies Empirical Variable Testing, dead atop Text Analysis and Theory-Embedded Experimentation and others. No, this "competition" will be eternal, and indeed, in this humble writer's opinion, it should be. Who can seriously argue that different modes of inquiry, a variety of methodologies, harms the common goal: the pursuit of knowledge? The more we know, the more we know, the more we know. And if you don't like a certain methodology, fine. Don't use it, and suck on that grain of salt when presented with results based on it. Otherwise, a multiplicity of ideas and methods, taken together, can only add to the body of knowledge. There are too many devoted Reflectivists who will never abandon their holistic approach, just as there will always be the numbers-minded Empiricists who inevitably view their labors as the most valid since you can't argue math. Most people, though--I would think--would want to take results from BOTH camps--and all those in between--together.