5 ms·

Showing a correlation without investigating the paths of causation is like blaming life for death.

by mdp2021 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
stametseater 4y ago
Death is an inevitability for us all. Depressed children is not.
itsoktocry 4y ago
"Correlation is not causation!" is a midwit[0] argument. Not everything can be a RCT. Correlation is where you start, and it doesn't take a ton of imagination to understand how causation might work in this case. [0]https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/iq-bell-curve-midwit https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/iq-bell-curve-midwit
- omnicognate 4y ago
  Middlebrow dismissal, as it's often called on hn. ("Shallow dismissal" in the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
  - cowuser666 4y ago
    It clarifies the point he's making. It's not the point itself.
    - omnicognate 4y ago
      Not sure what you mean? I wasn't correcting or disagreeing with anyone if that's what you thought.
  - mdp2021 4y ago
    > Middlebrow dismissal ...In Argument Theory. Not in the current context though, as the poster (hi there) expressed something quite different. Details around, if the original post does not suffice.
- mdp2021 4y ago
  Have you perchance misunderstood my post into that «Correlation is not causation»? What I meant is there literally: you have to «investigat[e] the paths of causation», which is meant to mean, you cannot (should not) practically fight the full correlated context, but the specific cause. I.e., in the picked metaphor: "you do not blame life for death" - find specific causes and curb them. Which, by the way, if the "«midwit»" reference were still applicable, is beyond "IQ", because what was expressed is meant to be "in the set of basics" - yet to appearance absent in the article. I expressed that the article seems to miss that basic point. I.e., the idea that "smartphones and social media" would be detrimental is extremely cheap, as if saying that "heating is polluting" - yes, and also useful, so you identify the weak parts and try to act on them. > and it doesn't take a ton of imagination But the article did not exercise that. And I think it would have been "kind of required". See my other reply nearby, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35102296 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35102296
frereubu 4y ago
You might like to read this if you're looking for causation: https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-illness-epidemic https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-ill...
- mdp2021 4y ago
  > looking for Thanks - but I was actually looking for a constructive article if from the FT, which requires avoiding a cheap early stopping in the class of "entrepreneurs are at risk of distress". Lack of analytic depth in the identification of strict causes that brings the article author to solutions like "«educate»" (to what?), "fight «addiction»", "pause then just stop", "have an age limit enforced". In the parallel: "entrepreneurs: know the risk, fight your drive to be a workaholic, take a vacation and maybe you will decide that it is a better life". And if you wanted to be on HN - well, let us see your documents (we'll check your age). ...Post naturally related to my other reply nearby.

Showing a correlation without investigating the paths of causation is like blaming life for death.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

stametseater 4y ago

Death is an inevitability for us all. Depressed children is not.

itsoktocry 4y ago

"Correlation is not causation!" is a midwit[0] argument. Not everything can be a RCT. Correlation is where you start, and it doesn't take a ton of imagination to understand how causation might work in this case. [0]https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/iq-bell-curve-midwit https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/iq-bell-curve-midwit

omnicognate 4y ago
Middlebrow dismissal, as it's often called on hn. ("Shallow dismissal" in the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
- cowuser666 4y ago
  It clarifies the point he's making. It's not the point itself.
  - omnicognate 4y ago
    Not sure what you mean? I wasn't correcting or disagreeing with anyone if that's what you thought.
- mdp2021 4y ago
  > Middlebrow dismissal ...In Argument Theory. Not in the current context though, as the poster (hi there) expressed something quite different. Details around, if the original post does not suffice.
mdp2021 4y ago
Have you perchance misunderstood my post into that «Correlation is not causation»? What I meant is there literally: you have to «investigat[e] the paths of causation», which is meant to mean, you cannot (should not) practically fight the full correlated context, but the specific cause. I.e., in the picked metaphor: "you do not blame life for death" - find specific causes and curb them. Which, by the way, if the "«midwit»" reference were still applicable, is beyond "IQ", because what was expressed is meant to be "in the set of basics" - yet to appearance absent in the article. I expressed that the article seems to miss that basic point. I.e., the idea that "smartphones and social media" would be detrimental is extremely cheap, as if saying that "heating is polluting" - yes, and also useful, so you identify the weak parts and try to act on them. > and it doesn't take a ton of imagination But the article did not exercise that. And I think it would have been "kind of required". See my other reply nearby, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35102296 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35102296

frereubu 4y ago

You might like to read this if you're looking for causation: https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-illness-epidemic https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-ill...

mdp2021 4y ago
> looking for Thanks - but I was actually looking for a constructive article if from the FT, which requires avoiding a cheap early stopping in the class of "entrepreneurs are at risk of distress". Lack of analytic depth in the identification of strict causes that brings the article author to solutions like "«educate»" (to what?), "fight «addiction»", "pause then just stop", "have an age limit enforced". In the parallel: "entrepreneurs: know the risk, fight your drive to be a workaholic, take a vacation and maybe you will decide that it is a better life". And if you wanted to be on HN - well, let us see your documents (we'll check your age). ...Post naturally related to my other reply nearby.