6 ms·

Hans Rosling doesn’t consider himself an optimist or pessimist but ‘possibilist’

164 points by devnonymous 10y ago

tim333 10y ago
Rosling's cheery stats are a good antidote to the usual horrors you see in the news.
- anondon 10y ago
  Pleasantly surprised to see the stats for a change.
  - devnonymous 10y ago
    I agree. After reading through that article I looked up gapminder ( https://www.gapminder.org/ https://www.gapminder.org/ | https://www.gapminder.org/data/ https://www.gapminder.org/data/ ). Good time sink.
- dahart 10y ago
  News is a business that needs to grab attention to survive, it has always had a built-in bias toward horrors and drama because those get attention. News rarely talks about how most things you care about are slowly and steadily getting better on average over time.
  - kqr 10y ago
    This is why I enjoyed reading The Economist. I might not have agreed with their editorial slant, but I loved how they didn't care much for human interest stories (or at least marginalised them) and did report on things slowly getting better all around the world. (Stopped reading not because I was discontent, rather because of a lack of time.)
    - lobster_johnson 10y ago
      The Economist is also one of the most strongly opinionated magazines currently being published. Almost every article says, quite loudly, what they think governments should be doing with whatever problem they're describing. Whereas the NY Times, for example, is much more understated, and will, if they offer a solution (or opinion) at all, outline the various pros/cons and leave the reader to infer what they really think. While I like The Economist a lot, my preferred source of reporting and analysis on news, culture and politics is The New York Review of Books. Their stable of superb, intellectual writers tackle all sorts of things (books, ironically, being pretty far down on the list) in a highly readable way. The Economist can get a little dry and monotonous after a while.
      - anonymousDan 10y ago
        How do you find the NYRoB compares to its London equivalent (which I really like)?
        lobster_johnson 10y ago
        LRB is great, too. I prefer NYRB, though I can't pinpoint anything specific; it's just that in any given issue, LRB tends to have a higher ratio of articles that I find too dry and academic. As you probably know, LRB was originally created by NYRB (it was initially published as a supplement), so they have a shared history and kinship. And of course, there are a ton of writers who are published in both, such as Tim Parks, Neal Ascherson, Tony Judt (RIP!) and Jonatham Lethem. The only reason I don't read both faithfully is that there's just not enough time in the world.
chiefalchemist 10y ago
Cause v correlation. Symptom v disease. We don't struggle with "facts" as much as we too often fail to apply enough critical thinking to get the real story identified and in context. Humans are shallow. We know this.
ebbv 10y ago
My problem with Rosling is that he furthers one of the problems with our modern discourse; the assumption that a given dataset inevitably leads to one conclusion. It's not true. I wish it were but it isn't. The same statistics about mass incarceration of African American males in the US that leads me to conclude that we have an issue of systemic racism leads far right people to conclude that African American males have an inherent tendency toward criminality. I would call that a gross misrepresentation of the data, but it is what happens. Rosling, in my mind, is guilty of misrepresenting some data, and I'm sure in his mind my conclusions based on the same data are equally ill informed. But Rosling tends, for me, not to make convincing arguments. He tends to throw up some graphs and say "Look! It's obvious we should do what I say!!"
- protomyth 10y ago
  No, folks on the right like to look at some other stats to broaden our understanding. A favorite statistic on the right is the number of African American adult males who grow up in low income situations without a father who then commit crimes as an adult. This same increase happens with every other race who is in a low income situation without a father in the house. Try not to throw dirt on others when making a point as people filter the point through the shade you cast.
  - steveeq1 10y ago
    I think culture also plays a role in explaining crime stats, not just poverty. Low income asian areas experience far fewer crime levels than corresponding low income black areas.
    - protomyth 10y ago
      Look at the statistics on fatherless homes and you'll see it even across race or culture as a future prediction of trouble.
      - mistermann 10y ago
        And fatherless homes by race? EDIT: I wonder how closely that tracks marijuana use, and how much fatherless homes are caused by incarceration.
awicz 10y ago
The criticisms of Rosling seem to surround around him painting with a broad brush and forming distilled conclusions. The trouble is that if Rosling were to dive into the details of these data and leave out conclusions the average person listening would get lost, have no actionable thesis, or both. I would include myself to be among these people. The admirable thing about his presentations are that he encourages his listeners to trust data and question their preconceptions. Certainly his methodolgy is not perfect. However, given how the public forms decisions right now (See US presidential election), I can't help but think this mentality is exactly what is needed.
- Jill_the_Pill 10y ago
  Amen. We have a lot of people digging through details in obscurity; we need a spokesman like this, of good will and broad understanding, instead of the usual shysters. There is a solid need for both roles; you don't criticize an epidemiologist for not being a surgeon.
criddell 10y ago
What a great article. Two things jumped out at me. First, I love the resolution in the opening story about the machete-wielding mob. The power of a single old woman to defuse a dangerous situation is fascinating. As a person in an industry built on the backs of youth, I sometimes wonder how wasteful we are being by focusing on the future and forgetting about the past. Second, it seems that Rosling's great superpower is communication. I love the Radio Lab podcast and am a firm believer that for a scientist, being able to tell stories about what you do is almost as important as the science.
dang 10y ago
Since the title and subtitle are baity, we switched to the photo caption.
agumonkey 10y ago
A combinatorialist
Fraterkes 10y ago
I don't have any specific critisism of Rosling (He seems very capable in a lot of ways). I think the part that many people find problematic is that he doesnt just present himself as a scientist but as someone who can interpret the data. And not just a normal interpreter but someone who has insights that almost nobody else has. You can argue wether this is true, but the fact is that this gives him an insane amount of credibility, and a kind of power that a non-expert should maybe use a little more sparingly.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
philipkglass 10y ago
"Possibilism" is a good way to think about the world: weighing what paths are opened by changes in scientific knowledge or human societies and what paths are blocked, but refusing to stay anchored to a conclusion just because it was true at one particular time in the past. It's unfortunate that "realist" has connotations of cynicism, because Rosling is a good realist in that he is more willing to discard conclusions than data.

164 points by devnonymous 10y ago

tim333 10y ago

Rosling's cheery stats are a good antidote to the usual horrors you see in the news.

anondon 10y ago
Pleasantly surprised to see the stats for a change.
- devnonymous 10y ago
  I agree. After reading through that article I looked up gapminder ( https://www.gapminder.org/ https://www.gapminder.org/ | https://www.gapminder.org/data/ https://www.gapminder.org/data/ ). Good time sink.
dahart 10y ago
News is a business that needs to grab attention to survive, it has always had a built-in bias toward horrors and drama because those get attention. News rarely talks about how most things you care about are slowly and steadily getting better on average over time.
- kqr 10y ago
  This is why I enjoyed reading The Economist. I might not have agreed with their editorial slant, but I loved how they didn't care much for human interest stories (or at least marginalised them) and did report on things slowly getting better all around the world. (Stopped reading not because I was discontent, rather because of a lack of time.)
  - lobster_johnson 10y ago
    The Economist is also one of the most strongly opinionated magazines currently being published. Almost every article says, quite loudly, what they think governments should be doing with whatever problem they're describing. Whereas the NY Times, for example, is much more understated, and will, if they offer a solution (or opinion) at all, outline the various pros/cons and leave the reader to infer what they really think. While I like The Economist a lot, my preferred source of reporting and analysis on news, culture and politics is The New York Review of Books. Their stable of superb, intellectual writers tackle all sorts of things (books, ironically, being pretty far down on the list) in a highly readable way. The Economist can get a little dry and monotonous after a while.
    - anonymousDan 10y ago
      How do you find the NYRoB compares to its London equivalent (which I really like)?
      - lobster_johnson 10y ago
        LRB is great, too. I prefer NYRB, though I can't pinpoint anything specific; it's just that in any given issue, LRB tends to have a higher ratio of articles that I find too dry and academic. As you probably know, LRB was originally created by NYRB (it was initially published as a supplement), so they have a shared history and kinship. And of course, there are a ton of writers who are published in both, such as Tim Parks, Neal Ascherson, Tony Judt (RIP!) and Jonatham Lethem. The only reason I don't read both faithfully is that there's just not enough time in the world.

chiefalchemist 10y ago

Cause v correlation. Symptom v disease. We don't struggle with "facts" as much as we too often fail to apply enough critical thinking to get the real story identified and in context. Humans are shallow. We know this.

ebbv 10y ago

My problem with Rosling is that he furthers one of the problems with our modern discourse; the assumption that a given dataset inevitably leads to one conclusion. It's not true. I wish it were but it isn't. The same statistics about mass incarceration of African American males in the US that leads me to conclude that we have an issue of systemic racism leads far right people to conclude that African American males have an inherent tendency toward criminality. I would call that a gross misrepresentation of the data, but it is what happens. Rosling, in my mind, is guilty of misrepresenting some data, and I'm sure in his mind my conclusions based on the same data are equally ill informed. But Rosling tends, for me, not to make convincing arguments. He tends to throw up some graphs and say "Look! It's obvious we should do what I say!!"

protomyth 10y ago
No, folks on the right like to look at some other stats to broaden our understanding. A favorite statistic on the right is the number of African American adult males who grow up in low income situations without a father who then commit crimes as an adult. This same increase happens with every other race who is in a low income situation without a father in the house. Try not to throw dirt on others when making a point as people filter the point through the shade you cast.
- steveeq1 10y ago
  I think culture also plays a role in explaining crime stats, not just poverty. Low income asian areas experience far fewer crime levels than corresponding low income black areas.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    Look at the statistics on fatherless homes and you'll see it even across race or culture as a future prediction of trouble.
    - mistermann 10y ago
      And fatherless homes by race? EDIT: I wonder how closely that tracks marijuana use, and how much fatherless homes are caused by incarceration.

awicz 10y ago

The criticisms of Rosling seem to surround around him painting with a broad brush and forming distilled conclusions. The trouble is that if Rosling were to dive into the details of these data and leave out conclusions the average person listening would get lost, have no actionable thesis, or both. I would include myself to be among these people. The admirable thing about his presentations are that he encourages his listeners to trust data and question their preconceptions. Certainly his methodolgy is not perfect. However, given how the public forms decisions right now (See US presidential election), I can't help but think this mentality is exactly what is needed.

Jill_the_Pill 10y ago
Amen. We have a lot of people digging through details in obscurity; we need a spokesman like this, of good will and broad understanding, instead of the usual shysters. There is a solid need for both roles; you don't criticize an epidemiologist for not being a surgeon.

criddell 10y ago

What a great article. Two things jumped out at me. First, I love the resolution in the opening story about the machete-wielding mob. The power of a single old woman to defuse a dangerous situation is fascinating. As a person in an industry built on the backs of youth, I sometimes wonder how wasteful we are being by focusing on the future and forgetting about the past. Second, it seems that Rosling's great superpower is communication. I love the Radio Lab podcast and am a firm believer that for a scientist, being able to tell stories about what you do is almost as important as the science.

dang 10y ago

Since the title and subtitle are baity, we switched to the photo caption.

agumonkey 10y ago

A combinatorialist

Fraterkes 10y ago

I don't have any specific critisism of Rosling (He seems very capable in a lot of ways). I think the part that many people find problematic is that he doesnt just present himself as a scientist but as someone who can interpret the data. And not just a normal interpreter but someone who has insights that almost nobody else has. You can argue wether this is true, but the fact is that this gives him an insane amount of credibility, and a kind of power that a non-expert should maybe use a little more sparingly.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

philipkglass 10y ago

"Possibilism" is a good way to think about the world: weighing what paths are opened by changes in scientific knowledge or human societies and what paths are blocked, but refusing to stay anchored to a conclusion just because it was true at one particular time in the past. It's unfortunate that "realist" has connotations of cynicism, because Rosling is a good realist in that he is more willing to discard conclusions than data.