5 ms·
>my own prediction is that future historians, if they haven't all been replaced by cognitive psychologists, will regard misplaced faith in data, metrics and sta
by wpasc 9y ago
>my own prediction is that future historians, if they haven't all been replaced by cognitive psychologists, will regard misplaced faith in data, metrics and statistical analysis as the curse of the twenty-first century
I think that line ruined the review for me, that whole paragraph just chastises the notion of evidence
- foldr 9y agoNo, it chastises misplaced faith in it.
- Stefan-H 9y agoCan one have a misplaced faith in evidence? Once there is evidence for something, it is not merely faith - faith is conviction without evidence. The whole point of the scientific process is to re-evaluate conclusions when new evidence is presented. I suppose historians may look back and find that some of our scientific beliefs were held in spite of evidence to the contrary, or that evidence was not sought out to disprove those beliefs, but I do not see how a full discrediting of data and statistics would one day happen.
- jsky_goog 9y agoI think an example of "misplaced faith in evidence" would be along the lines of equating correlation with causation based on evidence.
- Stefan-H 9y agoI disagree with that as an example of a "misplaced faith in evidence". That is coming to the wrong conclusion due to committing a false cause logical fallacy. Drawing the wrong conclusion should not be confused with a "misplaced faith in evidence". It seems that the religious really want to use the term faith in regards to science so as to imply that scientists "stoop to their level". That argument is seemingly often made that scientists have a blind faith in science. Certainly it happens that a scientist will hold onto beliefs against evidence, will doctor evidence to confirm their belief, and will cherry pick data to prove their belief that they hold despite evidence. But those are all actions that are antithetical to the scientific process. while and endemic to religion.
- foldr 9y ago>Can one have a misplaced faith in evidence? That's a semantic quibble which isn't really relevant to the point that Harrison is making in the rest of the quoted paragraph. But yes, you can have misplaced faith in e.g. null hypothesis significance testing and other methods of data collection and analysis common in some of the social sciences.
- Stefan-H 9y agoMy point was not that you can't have misplaced faith. But rather can you have misplaced faith in the notion of evidenced based conclusions. If your conclusions are based on evidence, then it isn't faith. It may still be wrong, but it isn't faith.
- piracy1 9y agoThe article is under the 'religion' section so it seems reasonable that the author (A religious scholar) would have some issues with a worldview based on empirical and provable evidence.
- dcre 9y agoWow, really deep thinking here. What a great demonstration of the rationality you apparently worship.
- defgeneric 9y agoThe argument isn't about facts. It's about the meaning of facts, and specifically their meaning for us.
- Noos 9y agoI don't know if they mean evidence in a specific sense. I think they mean misplaced faith in data in a meta sense, giving it more power to affect decisions than it should. The idea that everything can be solved by commissioning a study, acquiring data, and analyzing it. Or that "the data" becomes an unquestioning authority that you invoke. edit: the word "Scientism" is probably closer to the meaning here; science and rationality as a belief system in itself, as opposed to tools that help us understand physical processes. Faith in these tools to supply meaning and create a better society, often to absurd levels.
- merpnderp 9y agoIn a world of rewarded p-hacking, unrepeatable cancer research, of wild contentions being pulled from the loosest of correlations, you think faith in these things isn't a problem? Keep in mind faith has a specific meaning as a belief in something you yourself can't prove. IE, you aren't repeating these experiments, thus you take it on faith they are correct - a critique of science originally put forth by Richard Feynman the Nobel Prize winning physicist.