[FRIAM] anthropological observations

Fri Apr 17 19:08:44 EDT 2020

Glen,

Well, I think that all thinking is metaphorical (as does Dave), but let that go.  I agree that statements of the form "everything is X" really aren't awfully useful. 

I think an obsessively metaphorical thinker is one who has the arrogance to suppose that s/he has some familiar experience by which s/he can model any experience of another person.  I actually don't believe that that is true, but I think it is true enough that I feel it is my obligation to try.   

I am deeply suspicious of modal talk of any form because it is so often used in human interactions to manipulate other people.  "I probably will return your tools tomorrow".   My colleagues used to say, "I think the Department should improve its teaching."  So often in human affairs, modal language has no practicial consequences whatsoever except to confuse and lull the audience.  

Now, what most people wanted to know from Nate Silver is whether Clinton was going to win the election.  Nate constantly says that making such predictions is, strictly speaking, not his job.  As long as what happens falls within the error of his prediction, he feels justified in having made it.   He will say things like, "actually we were right."  I would prefer him to say, "Actually we were wrong, but I would make the same prediction under the same circumstances the next time.”  In other words, the right procedure produced, on this occasion, a wrong result.  

That’s all, 

Nick 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of u?l? ?
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 4:45 PM
To: FriAM <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Again, though, you seem to be allowing your metaphor to run away with you. When someone who does quantitative modeling says "expected value", they do NOT mean what the layperson means when they say "I expect X". We can pick apart your statement and accuse you of an ambiguity fallacy if we want.

Your first use of "expected value" relies on the jargonal definition. Then you switcheroo on us and your 2nd use of "I expect that" relies on the vernacular concept. Up to this point, we can give you the benefit of the doubt. We all munge things a bit when talking/thinking. But *then*, on your 3rd use of "what he expected", you explicitly switched the meaning from jargon to vernacular.

I don't think you do this on purpose. (If you do, I laud you as a fellow troll! >8^) I think it's  an artifact of your being a "metaphorical thinker", whatever that means.

FWIW, I only had to pull a little on the Sabine Hossenfelder thread to find that she tweeted this, as well:

Embracing the Uncertainties

While the unknowns about coronavirus abound, a new study finds we ‘can handle the truth.’

 <https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/07/science/coronavirus-uncertainty-scientific-trust.html?smid=tw-share> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/07/science/coronavirus-uncertainty-scientific-trust.html?smid=tw-share

The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers  <https://www.pnas.org/content/117/14/7672.abstract> https://www.pnas.org/content/117/14/7672.abstract

If they're right, then the right-leaning local media might band together with the clickbaity national media and give it to us straight ... or they might simply skew their "expected value" reporting to continue serving their politics. Pfft.

On 4/17/20 2:58 PM,  <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com> thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:

> If expert X tells me that the expected value of variable A is K, then, 

> when it's all over and the data are in, and A did not equal K, I expect that expert to admit that /what he expected did not happen./  Only after that confession has been made, should a conversation begin about whether the expert’s prediction process was faulted or not.  It seems to me that the shaded area is part of that second conversation.

--

☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe  <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

archives:  <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/> http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

FRIAM-COMIC  <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200417/00edeac3/attachment.html>