4 ms·

I'm neutral on this issue but let's look, for a start, at correlation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality https://en.wikipedia.

I'm neutral on this issue but let's look, for a start, at correlation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq... Not even accounting for Berkson's paradox yet (patience pls!), let's set Japan's gini as fiducial for free range parenting countries? Possible outliers: south Korea, hk (see also my comment below while initiating consideration of Berkson) Interesting datapoints: Ukraine, Iraq, pakistan To get an idea of the level of discourse we should be aiming for, how about we investigate those interesting datapoints to find out if we should consider median (non-extensive) PPP as a proxy for parenting free-rangedness♥

sigmoid10 2y ago
Funny how you use "interesting" instead of "disproving my argument." Rule Nr 1 in science is that you should never try to rationalise outliers before validating your model, because that is a dangerous line of thinking when you seek the truth. But I digress. At this point you will see anything in any statistic that validates you while being blind to the obvious. So I see no more reason in discussing this. Have a nice day.
- vinnyvichy 2y ago
  My only hypothesis that needed validation here is that you're a former (theoretical?) physicist who has never been unblinded from your cynicism by say, living outside a well-paid Anglo bubble, or maybe by getting the chance to level-up in statistics professionally (working at ai for the MMAANG doesn't count, and you know it) Let's revisit this conversation in 20 years' time when Pakistan has leapfrogged India. Keeping my fingers crossed for Ukraine
  - sigmoid10 2y ago
    I literally don't know what you're talking about, but it seems quite personal, off-topic, or plain delusional. It seems you are the one who really needs to spend some more time abroad to widen your perspectives. But I realize how this is easy to say for someone from a high income country who spent a lot of time working and travelling abroad, while people from low income countries will simply never get to see much of that. So I suppose the best I can say is that I feel sorry for you if you think this is what sets us apart. I wish the world didn't work that way.
    - vinnyvichy 2y ago
      >We cannot rule out the possibility that this ambivalence may have been intentional on Philodemus’s part Don't feel sorry, that's arrogance too :) More productively, how do you think your hypotheses differs from mine? All I'm saying here is, the question of how to find data in the world to answer the question of whether reducing inequality improves trust in society deserves attention and interest. Don't just stop at the null hypothesis? Cynicism means, waiting for data to reveal itself, even in absence of any nonnullhypothesis. Quite (median) physicist, to be fair? You also don't have to assume the null hypothesis that I am not like you :)
      - sigmoid10 2y ago
        Since you judged me so quickly on my comment history, let me return the favour: You seem to stem from an underprivileged background without formal education but have still accumulated a wide range of self taught topics which you use to engage in dogmatic ideologic discussions that never penetrate the surface, because if someone challenges you outside your shallow depth, you only get evasive and change the topic. Tbh this seems like a huge waste of time for any conversation, so you'll have to excuse me if I disengage here.
        vinnyvichy 2y ago
        Haha you are wrong.. I have a PhD.. and a number of MSc..

sigmoid10 2y ago

Funny how you use "interesting" instead of "disproving my argument." Rule Nr 1 in science is that you should never try to rationalise outliers before validating your model, because that is a dangerous line of thinking when you seek the truth. But I digress. At this point you will see anything in any statistic that validates you while being blind to the obvious. So I see no more reason in discussing this. Have a nice day.

vinnyvichy 2y ago
My only hypothesis that needed validation here is that you're a former (theoretical?) physicist who has never been unblinded from your cynicism by say, living outside a well-paid Anglo bubble, or maybe by getting the chance to level-up in statistics professionally (working at ai for the MMAANG doesn't count, and you know it) Let's revisit this conversation in 20 years' time when Pakistan has leapfrogged India. Keeping my fingers crossed for Ukraine
- sigmoid10 2y ago
  I literally don't know what you're talking about, but it seems quite personal, off-topic, or plain delusional. It seems you are the one who really needs to spend some more time abroad to widen your perspectives. But I realize how this is easy to say for someone from a high income country who spent a lot of time working and travelling abroad, while people from low income countries will simply never get to see much of that. So I suppose the best I can say is that I feel sorry for you if you think this is what sets us apart. I wish the world didn't work that way.
  - vinnyvichy 2y ago
    >We cannot rule out the possibility that this ambivalence may have been intentional on Philodemus’s part Don't feel sorry, that's arrogance too :) More productively, how do you think your hypotheses differs from mine? All I'm saying here is, the question of how to find data in the world to answer the question of whether reducing inequality improves trust in society deserves attention and interest. Don't just stop at the null hypothesis? Cynicism means, waiting for data to reveal itself, even in absence of any nonnullhypothesis. Quite (median) physicist, to be fair? You also don't have to assume the null hypothesis that I am not like you :)
    - sigmoid10 2y ago
      Since you judged me so quickly on my comment history, let me return the favour: You seem to stem from an underprivileged background without formal education but have still accumulated a wide range of self taught topics which you use to engage in dogmatic ideologic discussions that never penetrate the surface, because if someone challenges you outside your shallow depth, you only get evasive and change the topic. Tbh this seems like a huge waste of time for any conversation, so you'll have to excuse me if I disengage here.
      - vinnyvichy 2y ago
        Haha you are wrong.. I have a PhD.. and a number of MSc..