My Photo

« Summer Animation | Main | In Theory »

June 28, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c994053ef00e55394773f8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Theory - Meta Post:

Comments

gregory

look, in terms of reality science is nearly nothing, feeble fingers poking at the skin of an orange, wow, there are bumps!, and totally blind to the juice inside, let alone the magic in the seeds that can make another orange, or how to grow an orange tree

what is real is consciousness, inelegantly indicated with the "collective" word, since it is in essence non-differentiable ... and all,technology is, is a very cumbersome effort to manifest what consciousness can already do anyway

the petrbyte thing is merely a description of a model more all-encompassing than what came before, providing a closer approximation to reality ... but still a model, since reality is more than data

mysticsim is getting more valuable to understand everyday, if for no other reason than to provide a context for what we think we know

Daniel Tunkelang

I was appalled by Chris Anderson's article, because his suggestion that "correlation is enough" is not only demonstrably wrong, but also the root of much bad science. I also think he is misunderstanding how Google and others benefit from the vast increase in data.

Having more data doesn't mean you can just analyze it for patterns and treat those as discoveries. In fact, the term "data mining" used to mean exactly that, and it was pejorative--since it would discover meaningless correlations like one between the Super Bowl winner and stock market performance.

Having more data makes it easier to both *generate* and *test* hypotheses. But it is still important to keep these activities separate. That data hygiene is at the heart of the scientific method. Correlation does not supersede causation.

Sam Kuper

Do you mean "cognitive hysteria"?

Also, for more on whether "correlation is enough" - the core of Anderson's argument - see the literature in the philosophy of science (there is plenty of it). You might want to start with Karl Popper's distinction between corroboration and confirmation, and work on from there.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    September 2014

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4 5 6
    7 8 9 10 11 12 13
    14 15 16 17 18 19 20
    21 22 23 24 25 26 27
    28 29 30        

    Categories

    Blog powered by Typepad