To the mathematicians, correlation is a statement about random variables
But then this "true correlation" is unobservable, is it not? Except for trivial cases we can never know what it is and can only rely on estimates, aka empirical correlations.
In a causal model, correlation implies causation (somewhere).
Well, that makes Pearl's statement an uninteresting tautology. Correlation implies causation because we construct models this way...
People want to tell everything instead of telling the best 15 words. They want to learn everything instead of the best 15 words. In this thread, instead post the best 15-words from a book you've read recently (or anything else). It has to stand on its own. It's not a summary, the whole value needs to be contained in those words.
I'll start in the comments below.
(Voted by the Schelling study group as the best exercise of the meeting.)