7 ms·

> One of the great things about science is that we can determine whether a phenomenon is likely real without having to have the slightest clue what the mechanis

> One of the great things about science is that we can determine whether a phenomenon is likely real without having to have the slightest clue what the mechanism might be. You just have to ignore the people who shout "correlation is not causation" at every opportunity, appropriate or not.

georgemcbay 11y ago
There should be a name for those people who are quick to shout out some truism (that is actually true) but used out of context to a cliched degree. See also: "You're not Google's customer, you're the product"
- 0xcde4c3db 11y ago
  See also also: argument from fallacy, aka the "fallacy fallacy": claiming that a conclusion is wrong because an argument supporting it is invalid.
  - sangnoir 11y ago
    Not disagreeing, but there is a fine-line between an argument being wrong and that the conclusion being wrong. Are you really right when you use an incorrect argument/process/information to arrive to the right conclusion? There's a whole epistemological debate to be had about the intersection of belief, knowledge and truth.
Pharaoh2 11y ago
Because "correlation is not causation" is just plain wrong. What is should be is "correlation does not imply causation". This is where science comes in. To answer the question, is this correlation because of causation? The statement is only important to people doing statistical analysis not experimental science.
- coldtea 11y ago
  >correlation does not imply causation It sure does. It might not prove causation, or it might not necessitate causation, but it very much implies it. Somehow people forget that "imply" means: "indicate the truth or existence of (something) by suggestion rather than explicit reference". In this -- the dictionary and everyday sense -- correlation DOES imply (suggest) causation. It just doesn't secure it.
  - smadge 11y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_conditional https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_conditional aka implication or implies Definitions differ depending on the context, both definitions are valid.
  - graeme 11y ago
    That can't be right. There are so many spurious correlations that obviously imply nothing. There's got to be some other required factor before correlation can imply causation. Like "if there's reason to believe something is relevant, and there is correlation, then that implies causation. "
    - stephengillie 11y ago
      But a "reason to believe something is relevant" is a prejudged correlation.
    - taejo 11y ago
      imply, v. ... (transitive, of a person or proposition) to hint; to insinuate; to suggest tacitly and avoid a direct statement
  - roblev 11y ago
    99.26% correlation is observed between the Divorce Rate in Maine, and the Per Capita Consumption of Margarine http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations You say this implies causation... I have my doubts in any sense of the word implies. For sure, a correlation could lead to something to investigate, but look at enough data and you will find plenty of correlations that mean nothing. A lot depends on how the correlation is discovered (number of variables involved etc.).

georgemcbay 11y ago

There should be a name for those people who are quick to shout out some truism (that is actually true) but used out of context to a cliched degree. See also: "You're not Google's customer, you're the product"

0xcde4c3db 11y ago
See also also: argument from fallacy, aka the "fallacy fallacy": claiming that a conclusion is wrong because an argument supporting it is invalid.
- sangnoir 11y ago
  Not disagreeing, but there is a fine-line between an argument being wrong and that the conclusion being wrong. Are you really right when you use an incorrect argument/process/information to arrive to the right conclusion? There's a whole epistemological debate to be had about the intersection of belief, knowledge and truth.

Pharaoh2 11y ago

Because "correlation is not causation" is just plain wrong. What is should be is "correlation does not imply causation". This is where science comes in. To answer the question, is this correlation because of causation? The statement is only important to people doing statistical analysis not experimental science.

coldtea 11y ago
>correlation does not imply causation It sure does. It might not prove causation, or it might not necessitate causation, but it very much implies it. Somehow people forget that "imply" means: "indicate the truth or existence of (something) by suggestion rather than explicit reference". In this -- the dictionary and everyday sense -- correlation DOES imply (suggest) causation. It just doesn't secure it.
- smadge 11y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_conditional https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_conditional aka implication or implies Definitions differ depending on the context, both definitions are valid.
- graeme 11y ago
  That can't be right. There are so many spurious correlations that obviously imply nothing. There's got to be some other required factor before correlation can imply causation. Like "if there's reason to believe something is relevant, and there is correlation, then that implies causation. "
  - stephengillie 11y ago
    But a "reason to believe something is relevant" is a prejudged correlation.
  - taejo 11y ago
    imply, v. ... (transitive, of a person or proposition) to hint; to insinuate; to suggest tacitly and avoid a direct statement
- roblev 11y ago
  99.26% correlation is observed between the Divorce Rate in Maine, and the Per Capita Consumption of Margarine http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations You say this implies causation... I have my doubts in any sense of the word implies. For sure, a correlation could lead to something to investigate, but look at enough data and you will find plenty of correlations that mean nothing. A lot depends on how the correlation is discovered (number of variables involved etc.).