3 ms·
I have, and I really like it. If you read some of the historical debates between Judea Pearl and Don Rubin (of the Rubin Causal Model fame), and also Andrew Ge
by xtacy 8y ago
I have, and I really like it. If you read some of the historical debates between Judea Pearl and Don Rubin (of the Rubin Causal Model fame), and also Andrew Gelman (on his blog: http://andrewgelman.com/category/causal-inference/ http://andrewgelman.com/category/causal-inference/) you will have a much better appreciation of the nuances that Pearl was trying to push forth.
What I like about SEM and graphical model formulation is that it makes the model explicit and easy to communicate. It compactly encodes many hypotheses that you can test on your data.
- VHRanger 8y agoThe problem with Pearl is that, while his tools seem pristine, the way he tries to convince applied statisticians (econometricians foremost, but others too) to use them is very childishly argumentative. The best way to have those tools gain popularity with that crow is IMO to find a very cool application and publicize the hell out of it (like alexnet propelled deepnets from obscurity)
- xtacy 8y agoHis push into social sciences did not seem very childish to me; it was more like a plea to have more explicit models. I haven't come across his editorials for econometricians. Could you post some references that I can read?