5 ms·
I'm not saying "it's impossible to control anything", I am complaining about the idea that the world can be represented as a set of variables, that everything c
by astazangasta 10y ago
I'm not saying "it's impossible to control anything", I am complaining about the idea that the world can be represented as a set of variables, that everything can be quantified and broken down into axes, and this parameterization is a useful or helpful way to model the vast interacting complexity of a biological system. If you have ever tried to do PCA on a gene expression dataset, you know my pain. The exercise is futile; you are attempting to produce a description of the world based on a presumption that is wholly inadequate.
- jacques_chester 10y agoMy point was that you're introducing the nirvana fallacy: rejecting all attempts because they cannot satisfy a perfect outcome. That it's impossible to perfectly model reality is not news in any scientific field. In any case, I was talking about grossly observable variables such as "does this person exercise at all?", or "do they smoke?" or "do they drink?". You'd be surprised how many studies don't bother to check simple factors like these.