Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science
Nudgelords: Given their past track record, why should I trust them this time? (Don’t call me Stasi)
Andrew Gelman | Professor of Statistics and Political Science and Director of the Applied Statistics Center, Columbia University
Bonus
Joan Robinson on conventional economics.
Thinking about thinking
Lars P. Syll | Professor, Malmo University
Related
But shared beliefs that are in conflict with science continue to exist, and the rights of people to hold those beliefs are enshrined in the US Constitution and in many other secular democratic countries.
Are there costs to this policy? If yes, then how to operationalize the cost-benefit analysis if qualitative data are involved?
This is treated differently in different legal systems and jurisdictions. Is there a compelling argument that the US approach to liberalism is "natural" and therefore authoritative universally?
Science, Belief, And Democracy
Robert Costanza | Professor and Vice Chancellor’s Chair in Public Policy at the Crawford School of Public Policy
Originally at The Solutions Journal
8 comments:
Cass Sunstein does not understand probability. That explains his illogical postings.
But shared beliefs that are in conflict with science continue to exist,
As if current science is the last word. baloney.
Anyone remember when a Steady State Universe was the current word in cosmology? Well, that turned out to be wrong and an embarrassment to some whose philosophical preference was for there to be no Beginning and thus no disturbing (to them) possibility of a Creator.
“Understand probability”
Oxymoron...
If you have to examine something via probability it means you don’t understand it..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_equation
Fudgelords are renowned for their skill with statistics and spreadsheets.
Who wants to audition for the position of "Reality Czar"?
And try to build the new "New Soviet Man"?
Been watching Russian WWII movies and they remind me that the Reds found soldiers would fight for Mother Russia but not so much for the Soviet Union and the "New Soviet Man" project.
Is there a compelling argument that the US approach to liberalism is "natural" and therefore authoritative universally? Tom Hickey
In a word, NO!
1) The US has an economic system that violates equal protection under the law in favor of the rich.
2) The US has degraded itself into confusing children into allowing themselves to be sexually mutilated.
The US is close, if not at, being a laughing stock for its obvious errors.
Btw, "traditional" is not traditional without long experience at alternatives that failed ... Iow, this nonsense too shall pass but not necessarily without massive bloodshed...
Post a Comment