论文部分内容阅读
本刊去年第2期刊出了两篇有关地质报告改革的讨论文章,读后颇受启发,因而也想谈一点看法,参加讨论。 1.地质报告改革的目标是“三性”(针对性、实用性、科学性)“三化”(标准化、表格化、数据化),是个新的提法,有其一定的背景和正确性。但说“实用性是指提交的地质报告应适应和满足下一阶段地质工作决策以及基本建设程序和矿山设计的需要,无关的、关系不大的不写或少写”,则解释上过于狭隘,它将使勘查中获得的对科研、教学以及对地质勘查本身发展有用的资料得不到反映,从而降低了地质报告的更广泛实用性。标准化无疑是正确的,但表格化、数据化从词意上似欠严密,什么是“数据”,“化”到什么程度?“表格化”了是否就体现了科学性?这是值得探讨的。
In the 2nd issue last year, the journal published two articles discussing the reform of geological reporting. After reading it, it was very inspiring. Therefore, we also wanted to discuss some ideas and participate in the discussion. 1. The goal of the reform of geological reporting is “three-dimensional” (targeted, practical, and scientific) “threeizations” (standardization, tabularization, and dataization). It is a new formulation and has a certain background and correctness. . However, “practicality means that the submitted geological report should adapt to and meet the needs of the next phase of geological work decisions and the needs of the basic construction procedures and mine design, and the unrelated, less relevant, non-writing or underwriting” is too narrow in interpretation. It will make it impossible to reflect on the scientific research, teaching, and the useful information for the development of geological exploration. It will reduce the wider practicality of geological reporting. Standardization is undoubtedly correct, but tabularization and dataization seem to be rigorous in word sense. What is “data” and “degree”? To what extent does “formulation” reflect scientificity? This is worth exploring. .