4 ms·
I can think of 4 things that would make a science-based discussion around those sensitive topics more palatable: 1) All data is in distributions, and so no pred
by daenz 4y ago
I can think of 4 things that would make a science-based discussion around those sensitive topics more palatable: 1) All data is in distributions, and so no predictions can be made about an individual based on distributions. 2) "Better" is a meaningless term in these discussions. 3) Any traits are the result of optimization for a particular environment. 4) Everyone should be treated with respect.
- worik 4y ago> 1) All data is in distributions, and so no predictions can be made about an individual based on distributions. Good luck with getting people to accept that. It is obvious to any statistician, but I have had arguments with experienced researches who cannot grasp this simple fact
- _aavaa_ 4y agoMaybe that means something different to me than it does to you, but you definitely can make predictions about individuals. Is that not what a prior? If I hear that someone is 12 years old and I know nothing else about them, then assuming their height is the mode for that age group is as good of a prediction as you can make.
- astrange 4y agoA more important point is that the instant you meet someone, you have far more information about them than knowing their genetics would give you. So it'd be strange to meet a Dutch person and go "hah, by your genetics I predict you're 190cm tall" if you're looking at them and they're short.
- robonerd 4y agoYeah, but sometimes friendly looking dogs aren't so friendly. There are some general signs you can look for in a dog's body language and behavior, but unless you've spent a lot of time with that dog you just don't know for sure.
- _aavaa_ 4y agoYes. But until then all you have with are the statistics.