4 ms·
You don’t always need a big n to make causal conclusions. Do you know the story about the king who gets served a soup? Because he’s frightened that the soup mig
by blumomo 6y ago
You don’t always need a big n to make causal conclusions. Do you know the story about the king who gets served a soup? Because he’s frightened that the soup might be poisoned, he gives it to his food tester first because the king reasons like this: „If my food tester (n=1) doesn’t die, then I probably won’t die, too, when I eat the soup“.
Many great philosophers have argued, that people should use their common sense instead of requesting big tests. Therefore no big n‘s are needed. Start thinking.
- jwilber 6y ago??? The Kong’s conclusion wasn’t causal with any statistical certainty (which is what the above is arguing). It was anecdotal. Maybe the poison doesn’t work for carriers of certain genes. Maybe it’s temperature reactive. Maybe it’ll take weeks to kill. Just because the King observes something do not make his causal conclusions from that observation valid. Adequate sample-sized statistics aim to bridge that gap.
- natalyarostova 6y ago> The Kong’s conclusion wasn’t causal with any statistical certainty (which is what the above is arguing). It was anecdotal. There ain't no such thing as statistical certainty my friend.
- gridlockd 6y agohttp://gunshowcomic.com/831 http://gunshowcomic.com/831
- tinus_hn 6y agoWell that settles it. Better keep on doing nothing!
- Fjolsvith 6y ago(n=0)
- bryanrasmussen 6y agoit must suck to be the king, waiting a couple hours to a day to make sure the food tester doesn't die of a slow acting poison before eating oneself. Just thinking.
- squnch 6y agoThis King story is apropos of... nothing.