13 ms·

I don't think it is a misunderstanding. For example, the overall rate of heart attacks could be something like 10%, but that doesn't mean that I personally hav

by samspot 14y ago

I don't think it is a misunderstanding. For example, the overall rate of heart attacks could be something like 10%, but that doesn't mean that I personally have a 10% chance of having a heart attack. My actual chance is likely higher or lower depending on my family history and other factors. Group statistics give us valuable information, but they are not the whole story.

brockf 14y ago
But, by talking about the "other factors", you are just re-configuring the group from which one would assess your individual probability of having a heart attack. You're right that group statistics aren't meaningful when the individual is not part of that group but, if that's not the case, then group statistics are the best source of predictive power.
kybernetikos 14y ago
People usually incorrectly assume that they are special. While it's certainly possible that there are extenuating circumstances that mean you aren't going to have a heart attack, in the absence of really strong evidence pointing in another direction, it's more rational to assume that the group statistic does apply to you.
- dasil003 14y ago
  One isn't a scientist observing one's own life. Being a realist is a good principle, but rationality is not an end unto itself. In the field of human endeavour, mental attitude is a huge factor. You can weigh out different cases in terms of odds, but the actor who dwells upon statistical improbability will have a much smaller chance of success than the one focused on actually achieving the goal despite the odds.
  - kybernetikos 14y ago
    It's true that mental attitude is important, but you can still take a rational approach to situations like this. Look honestly at the odds. If you accept them, then cultivate the appropriate mental attitude to help you succeed, but if you do not start with a realistic assessment of the true situation then you are likely to waste much effort trying to replicate the paths that outliers have taken, effort that could have been better spent. That realistic assessment should start by assuming that in the absence of further data you are a typical member of your class. If you have ideas about ways in which you are different to your class, try to validate them with actual data before making judgements based on them, because another feature of typical members of the human race is that they frequently invent spurious reasons to believe they are atypical.

by samspot 14y ago

brockf 14y ago

But, by talking about the "other factors", you are just re-configuring the group from which one would assess your individual probability of having a heart attack. You're right that group statistics aren't meaningful when the individual is not part of that group but, if that's not the case, then group statistics are the best source of predictive power.

kybernetikos 14y ago

People usually incorrectly assume that they are special. While it's certainly possible that there are extenuating circumstances that mean you aren't going to have a heart attack, in the absence of really strong evidence pointing in another direction, it's more rational to assume that the group statistic does apply to you.

dasil003 14y ago
One isn't a scientist observing one's own life. Being a realist is a good principle, but rationality is not an end unto itself. In the field of human endeavour, mental attitude is a huge factor. You can weigh out different cases in terms of odds, but the actor who dwells upon statistical improbability will have a much smaller chance of success than the one focused on actually achieving the goal despite the odds.
- kybernetikos 14y ago
  It's true that mental attitude is important, but you can still take a rational approach to situations like this. Look honestly at the odds. If you accept them, then cultivate the appropriate mental attitude to help you succeed, but if you do not start with a realistic assessment of the true situation then you are likely to waste much effort trying to replicate the paths that outliers have taken, effort that could have been better spent. That realistic assessment should start by assuming that in the absence of further data you are a typical member of your class. If you have ideas about ways in which you are different to your class, try to validate them with actual data before making judgements based on them, because another feature of typical members of the human race is that they frequently invent spurious reasons to believe they are atypical.