Morendil comments on Rationality quotes: June 2010 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: Morendil 01 June 2010 06:07PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (215)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Morendil 19 June 2010 10:51:25AM 7 points [-]

Everyone who takes basic statistics has it drilled into them that "correlation is not causation." (When I took psych. 1, the professor said he hoped that, if he were to come to us on our death-beds and prompt us with "Correlation is," we would all respond "not causation.") This is a problem, because one can infer correlation from data, and would like to be able to make inferences about causation. There are typically two ways out of this. One is to perform an experiment, preferably a randomized double-blind experiment, to eliminate accidental sources of correlation, common causes, etc. That's nice when you can do it, but impossible with supernovae, and not even easy with people. The other out is to look for correlations, say that of course they don't equal causations, and then act as if they did anyway.

-- Cosma Shalizi on Graphical Models

Comment author: TheOtherDave 06 March 2012 05:26:48PM *  1 point [-]

Obligatory xkcd reference

That said... treating correlations as evidence of causation isn't unreasonable, as long as I remember that the world is full of evidence of falsehoods as well as truths, and calibrate accordingly.

Comment author: TraderJoe 06 March 2012 05:13:20PM *  0 points [-]

[comment deleted]

Comment author: wedrifid 19 June 2010 11:12:01AM 0 points [-]

Far too true. :)