3 ms·

You are consistently drawing questionable conclusions from N=1 samples here, and in your follow up comments.

• maxharris 15y ago
  If you haven't met anyone with an experience somewhat like mine, ask around. My story isn't the common case, but I'm not the only one. At any rate, what does that matter? Why should the interests of one child (or adult) necessarily conflict with that of any other, or group of them? Is the goal that everyone should flourish the most from wherever they start, or is it that they should end up with the most identical result possible, regardless of the individuals? Edit: remember that a statistical approach is only valid in a certain context. For example, you only need evidence that a judge has taken bribes from the Mafia once to know that he's corrupt. There are other contexts where statistics are vital (in the special sciences, for example - I think of quantum probability, or statistical thermodynamics), but I don't believe that statistics properly enter into the fundamental science of philosophy and its branches (Plato, so far as I am aware, did not rely on statistical concepts to discover that there's such a thing as metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and then politics). If statistics were a fundamental science (intellectually speaking), on what basis could we justify its correct uses vs. incorrect ones?