82,921
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
So here’s the thing, and I am straining to avoid distracting myself onto my pet subjects of transcendent truth and causal skepticism, so bear with me: | So here’s the thing, and I am straining to avoid distracting myself onto my pet subjects of transcendent truth and causal skepticism, so bear with me: | ||
Even if you accept some objectivist model where, whether we can know it or not, there ''is'' a true, unique, cause for every effect — and down that rabbit hole are a bunch of consequences you really wouldn’t like, but let’s say — it follows that an event | Even if you accept some [[reductionism|objectivist ]] model where, whether we can know it or not, there ''is'' a true, unique, cause for every effect — and down that rabbit hole are a bunch of consequences you really wouldn’t like, but let’s say — it follows that an event must have but ''one'' cause, or causal matrix, to the absolute exclusion of any other explanation. | ||
That is to say, for every single true cause, there are multiple [[spurious correlation]]s — events that serendipitously ''seem'', by their statistical regularity, to have causal significance to a given effect but, in fact, don’t. | |||
How many is “multiple”? ''Depends on how much data, and how much imagination, you’ve got''. Seeing as [[the portion of all data we have collected is nil]], the actual answer is that ''there are infinitely more spurious correlations than there are true ones''. The likelihood that any given correlation is the true cause is 1/∞, which is ''zero''. | How many is “multiple”? ''Depends on how much data, and how much imagination, you’ve got''. Seeing as [[the portion of all data we have collected is nil]], the actual answer is that ''there are infinitely more spurious correlations than there are true ones''. The likelihood that any given correlation is the true cause is 1/∞, which is ''zero''. | ||
A lack of correlation may not increase the likelihood of events being causally related, ''but nor does a correlation''. Especially seeing as there maybe some data, as yet uncollected, or unnarratised, that explains the decorrelation of events that are, in fact, causally related. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[In God we trust, all others must bring data]] | *[[In God we trust, all others must bring data]] |