4 ms·
It's interesting how the reification of statistical reasoning, that is, understanding statistics symbolically and applying it to abstract symbols is far more fr
by danharaj 11y ago
It's interesting how the reification of statistical reasoning, that is, understanding statistics symbolically and applying it to abstract symbols is far more fraught than the implicit statistical reasoning that this article describes.
- stormbrew 11y agoYour brain is also able to calculate the parabolic arc of a baseball someone threw to you whether or not you could ever do it on paper.
- IanCal 11y agoThat's not quite true. When catching a ball we constantly adjust as we go so we're not perfectly calculating where it will land. We can train humans to roughly approximate where a ball will land, that's about it.
- stormbrew 11y agoThis is just a matter of precision. The fact that you can probably start adjusting in a meaningful and probably correct way while the ball is still going up is significant. Somehow that person's brain is doing a thing they may not have the symbolic knowledge to describe.
- IanCal 11y ago> Somehow that person's brain is doing a thing they may not have the symbolic knowledge to describe. And we can draw roughly correct circles but most people don't know the equation for one. I'm not sure that's particularly significant though, but I may have missed your point.
- Houshalter 11y agoNo the ability to draw circles is impressive. The amount of math and calculations being done in the brain to perform such a feat is incredible. Programming robots to do even a limited range of the things humans do, is nearly impossible.
- zoke 11y agothe constant adjustments are also needed for influences of wind, temperature and or weather elements.