>He thinks statistics mean anything in the real world
>He doesn't understand that experience and anecdotes are all that matter and real life is something to be experienced rather than just analyzed in laboratory settings through microscopes, hypothesized, and number-crunched.
I never thought anecdotes were all that important.
>>26587111
trips don't lie
too bad they will come up with a statistic to prove you wrong (at least they will try)
They don't realize they are just bringing themselves down but it isn't like that's my problem
>>26587111
>filename mila_kunis.jpg
pretty sure thats natalie portman senpai
What do anecdotes have to do with anything?
>statistics mean nothing in the real world
That must be why "real world" businesses rely on statistics
>>26587257
Businesses rely on experienced businessmen who know how to maximize sales and increase profits. It's not statistics that make them great, it's their own abilities (built through experience) that allow them to dominate in their fields.
>>26587224
>being this new
Original comment wifhusja
>>26587111
objective reality has to be quantifiable, your "feelings" don't count as truth
>statistics isn't actionable information that's useful
On the contrary. It's very important to consider statistics when doing most things to achieve a desired outcome. By your logic not getting a job because you don't like the idea of having a job is a good idea. But what the real reason you get a job for is because you're very unlikely to be given a situation where you can live happily without one.
>>26587111
I completely agree actually.
Never really understood why 'anecdotal evidence' is dismissed. I have my views because of my experiences, others have different ones because of theirs.
You can never argue a point based on anecdotal evidence but you sure as hell can defend your stance with it
>kill objectivity
>the only thing left becomes consensus
>consensus can be manipulated
Welcome to being a useful idiot, OP.
>there's an 80% chance I won't get a gf
>therefore I will never get a gf
Robots really don't understand statistics.
what if your life experience matches the statistics?
>>26587468
Anecdotal evidence is dismissed as a good way to motivate larger ideas because it's so volatile. It's not a bad thing in your personal life.
>>26587480
objectivity doesn't exist. read some philosophy or something for once
>>26587480
it's not that consensus isn't reality, it's that we have to be able to communicate what we are observing in objective terms. subjective things like feelings are very important but they don't help us communicate in un-abstract terms
>if you run an experiment and the results are 99.99% the same consensus dictates that's reality
>>26587434
Objective reality is diluted by any form of metaphorization. Words and numbers are metaphors for reality, or used to represent reality. But in essence, by writing down objective truth or "quantifying it", you bastardize reality because you cannot capture everything there is to the reality.
This isn't an argument of subjectivity. It's an argument against what scientists consider to be "objectivity" which is writing down data, performing studies, and quantifying numbers. Scientists cannot capture objective reality because there is always a limit to how humans can effectively record any event or describe any object. However, experiencing something is in essence objectively far superior to just scientific number crunching and pencil pushing.
Hence why people are not driven to or are satisfied with studying skydiving, but actually infatuated by the experience of skydiving. Thus we can conclude that experience trumps statistics.
>>26587111
>this post reflects real opinions held by others
Just let me die senpai.
>>26587548
we can express things in formal logic which is more or less a proxy for objectivity (there is weird shit like quantum physics were formal logic breaks down).
>>26587553
>Hence why people are not driven to or are satisfied with studying skydiving, but actually infatuated by the experience of skydiving. Thus we can conclude that experience trumps statistics.
>you will never have super powers
>you can't enjoy comic books
Not to mention your post is a retarded non-sequitur, you don't need personal experience to bang out the likelihood of events.
>>26587548
>objectivity doesn't exist
But pure subjectivity is retarded, senpai. If I feel that the world is flat, I can convince enough people to believe me in a subjective world. Facts and proof exist for a reason.
>>26587550
Consensus can be reality, but it can also be removed from reality. Objectivity and proof are required to let us tell the difference.
>>26587553
>Hence why people are not driven to or are satisfied with studying skydiving, but actually infatuated by the experience of skydiving. Thus we can conclude that experience trumps statistics.
if you could simulate sky diving with virtual reality so that you could subjectively "experience" sky diving without actually having gone sky diving is that any less valid? is the reduction of sky diving to a computer program a bastardization of a sacrosanct reality?
>>26587489
I'm sorry, can you not get depressed over the unlikelihood of an event?
>>26587682
Why bernanke posting?
>>26587340
>what is data analysis
>what are projections
>>26587682
The thrill of skydiving is also the perceived idea of potentially dying. Simulating skydiving removes the time and space aspect of skydiving, IE jumping out of a real airplane and actually diving in the sky. Participants would know that it is only being simulated. If you were to simulate skydiving, one wouldn't experience skydiving, they'd be experiencing simulated skydiving, which would have it's own properties and lack certain properties of conventional skydiving.
>>26587553
>scientists use carefully formatted and standardized measures to describe something after repeated experiments that must undergo stringent reviews by peers
>your anecdotes are remembered using personal, subjective methods and expressed through personal bias
wanting to punch a post: the post
>anecdotal evidence carries more weight than actual statistics
>>26587776
this is a hypothetical, so suppose you could 100% simulate the reality of sky diving, even the fear of death (i don't see why you couldn't.)
>>26587708
why not?
>>26587111
>lol not everything is in your books, nerd
Anecdoctal evidence can be a lie.
experience can be a lie.
You think all the stories on here are true?
So if someone tells me they're raped, I should just believe them?
Wew lad. You think like a woman.
>>26587827
But why though? I want to know.
>>26587652
but they're still subjective. all i mean by this is that science isn't as "factual" as most people would like to believe, and as OP was saying, that statistics are given way too much value
>>26587944
oh absolutely, but that isn't because reality can't be expressed in statistics, it's mostly human error
http://www.npr.org/2015/08/28/435416046/research-results-often-fail-to-be-replicated-researchers-say
>>26587944
Sometimes you've gotta dig beneath what a person is saying and cut to what it means as applied to the real world, as much as OP purports living in the real world, he obviously hasn't thought about it from a realistic perspective like he claims.
Ops post: My feelings> greater than objective facts
Why? because they're more exciting than data and make me feel more alive.
>>26587687
Yeah no I absolutely do. I guess I juste remember that that I can either keep gathering reasons to kill myself, or just realize that I'm not going to and stop focusing on the bad. It's nearly impossible, but sometimes its fine just to think "well, there's a 10% chance this won't fail".
>>26587944
Stop thinking in absolutes. Of course they're subjective. Absolutely everything is subjective. The goal is to get as close to scientific truth as possible.
>>26587944
>>26588004
found the planet money episode on this subject
http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/01/15/463237871/episode-677-the-experiment-experiment
>>26587111
Who is "he"?
sidogasd (Sorry, need to be original)
>H-haha look at this study from 2007 that says NIGGERS are more likely to be crack addicts than white master race
>Thats it no more studying required its black and white, plain and simple. Numbers dont lie
When will autists be banned from politics.
>>26587111
Statistics describe the real world, dumbass
I mean I would love for the world to be a nice place where we all will "make it" if we try hard enough, but that's not the reality.
>>26587111
>He thinks statistics mean anything in the real world
They do, people just ignore them because it interferes with their idea of the ideal reality. If there's a 90% chance of something bad happening to you, you wouldn't do that thing unless you're an idiot. That's why white people don't walk through ghetto neighborhoods.
>>26588075
>statistics that run counter to my worldview immediately have to be discarded by accusing them of being racist
>>26588081
Another detatched and autistic loner who lacks any human soul
>>26588121
>Strawmans
>Posts a pure analytical infograph
Hm these statistics couldn't possibly have to do with 200+ years of oppression and undermining.
>>26588096
>They do, people just ignore them because it interferes with their idea of the ideal reality
^
>>26588004
i don't doubt media trying to make things seem more important than they are for clicks and all of that shit. i don't believe statistics are completely worthless or something, but i try to remain skeptical for that same fact. media will definitely bring to the forefront statistics that will further their agenda, etc. they are manipulated in many ways to give people the answers you want them to see. now that's all the fault of the presentation, but still, not everything can be explained by a statistic. i'm more of taking a middle ground than saying one is more worthful than the other.
>>26588031
i can't speak for OP, not really reading what he's been saying besides the original post. these are all just my thoughts on the matter.
>>26588045
i'm not the one thinking in absolutes, lol. scientists are the ones who like absolutes more than anyone else. i'm pretty open minded when it comes to these things. a statistic showing something doesn't necessarily mean it is a "fact". taking a statistic that you don't know all of the details of as anything more than a grain of salt can be very naive.
>>26588096
i've actually been to the hood on numerous occasions, have many friends who live in the hood, and have lived very close to the hood (as in separated by a single street from open-air drug markets). if you know how to handle yourself in a bad neighborhood and/or know people living in the neighborhood you should be fine.
>yes i'm white
>>26588276
>taking a statistic that you don't know all of the details of as anything more than a grain of salt can be very naive.
So take umbrage with the methodology or lack of explainable mechanism or poor control for variables.
Most robots get shouted down when they try to argue their opinions, statistics are a strong ally to bolster what you've already observed.
>>26588276
>i can't speak for OP, not really reading what he's been saying besides the original post. these are all just my thoughts on the matter.
Yeah, no. It's all good.
I apologize if it seems like I'm pointing the finger at you. We're just having a nice little discussion, that's all.
>>26588276
i agree that the media is abused to further agendas, but basically everything can be expressed as a 1 or a 0, things either are or they aren't (except in quantum physics where they can be both)
>>26587532
I can dig that.
>>26588128
>Continentalists make broad generalizations based on intuition
>analysts question their assumptions
>anything wrong with that
>>26588185
That was a weak response
Besides, even if that was true, who the fuck cares why? It's the fact that it's currently the case
Is this thread secretly about divorce risk and cheating being positively correlated with sexual partner count? The only other arcanine statistics I know of are the manlet ones and the sex market meme one.
>>26587340
>>He thinks statistics mean anything in the real world
>>26587111
>Businesses rely on experienced businessmen who know how to maximize sales and increase profits. It's not statistics that make them great, it's their own abilities (built through experience) that allow them to dominate in their fields.
This is what retarded conservative christians actually believe.
Also, most of these business men you worship and drool over get where they are through nepotism. They rely on the nerds in R&D and the guys in statistics to run there company for them.
Stop spreading this poison, objective evidence prevents deceit and lies from reigning supreme in society. You are a useful idiot or a shill.
>>26588128
>"What? You actually like to see statistics and facts to prove a statement instead of emotional conjecture? You are autistic and a fedora bearer xDD"
How does it feel to be objectively retarded OP? What corporate interests interested in dumbing down the public pay you to shill this board? Or are you really just that fucking stupid?
>>26588318
i agree completely. but usually when an argument, especially around here, devolves into "but this says that", it just becomes this game of "find the statistic that supports what I say", and then it grows stale. i mean there's tons of reliable statistics that show useful facts on things, but it's just they are so easily manipulated. it's frustrating, i actually hate arguing about statistical things for this reason. once again i don't think anything is wrong with statistics, as long as they are truly reliable.
>>26588365
that's okay, thanks anon for keeping it civil.
>>26588385
i can understand your point of view, although i personally don't feel so absolute about it. if we're talking about matter and such, existence, than i can probably say for a fact that i exist, but there is plenty of things i think that "exist" but aren't necessarily factual from a scientific standpoint. and sometimes, something that may be considered fact can later to be found that it actually isn't a fact, it's not like we have the answer to everything with all of our current knowledge. if everything is either a 1 or a 0, but can change from one to the other depending on how much knowledge we have as a species, then how can we -truly- say that anything can either be a fact or not? factual things only exist to us in the scope we have, from our perspective. there's no telling if somewhere down the line in existence everything we know could be flipped upside down. not saying it would happen, necessarily, but hypothetically if it did then all comprehension would be utterly destroyed. again, it's hypothetical, and maybe not very likely, and some people would maybe even call me crazy for thinking something like this, but it's just how i feel about things.
>it thinks correlation isn't causation
