= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanArmak comments on What truths are actually taboo? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (293)
Yes, yes it does.
The point made by the OP is that is a true implication. If crime rates are higher in certain genetic subgroups, that is valid (if perhaps weak) evidence for a purely genetic correlation with crime, all else being equal. So it's reasonable to conclude someone believing the first fact, also believes the second one to a degree. And this would not be a problem if the issue were not taboo.
The word "implies" in the phrase "correlation implies causation" typically uses the technical meaning of imply in logic which is quite different from it's common usage as a synonym for "hint" or "suggest".
Good point. I wonder if people (other than me) normally understand this sentence that way?
Most people do not know logic, so it's unlikely to be that widespread.