One of the major stumble points in research has to do with Exceptions. On one hand, Exceptions hint about interesting hidden phenomena that may be relevant and therefore should be included in the research input, and on the other hand they defuse and blur the research without offering it much help in reconstructing better hypotheses, therefore there is no choice but to eliminate them from the input in the hope that such elimination wouldn’t compromise the input authenticity.

The common practice regarding this dilemma is simple, perhaps too simple. It defines Exceptions as OUTLIERS. This practice raises a logical objection regarding the legitimacy of can be viewed as CARVING THE RESULTS to suit preliminary ideas.

Note that my New Data Science theory defines Exceptions as patterns that don't share any key-factor with other patterns, i.e. patterns that are different by their behavior not by their values, thus leave room for just EXTREME cases of already established phenomena.

How to define Exception in you opinion, taking the above into consideration?

More Edith Ohri's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions