Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 20:53:53 UTC No. 16279318

Read pic related

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality_(book)

Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 20:55:28 UTC No. 16279319

>OY VEY STOP NOTICING COHENCIDENCES!!!
>CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION YOU STUPID GOY!!!

Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 20:57:45 UTC No. 16279326

Correlation does equal to causation, but causation is not always due to correlation.

Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 20:58:36 UTC No. 16279328

>>16279317
We replaced one logical fallacy

>Correlation always equals causation

with another fallacy

>Correlation never equals causation.

Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 21:01:22 UTC No. 16279336

>>16279317
>how
by doing experiments to show causation lmao kys

Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 21:17:42 UTC No. 16279364

>>16279317
This is like statistics 101. If there's a correlation between A and B then you aren't sure of the direction. A could cause B or B could cause A. If you presuppose there's a causation then your presupposing the direction, that A causes B. Statistically they're the same, just your interpretation that's different.

Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:12:12 UTC No. 16279450

>>16279319
>"anti-zionist doesn't mean anti-semitic!!1!"
>casually equates being jewish with being a zionist
what did she mean by this?

Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 01:13:36 UTC No. 16279670

>>16279328
A similar thing has happened with the slippery slope argument. Anyone opposing a small change (especially politically) because they're wary of the direction it leads is accused of fallacious reasoning, even though the slope very often does turn out to be slippery. There's a reason the phrase "give someone an inch and they'll take a mile" has been around for half a millennium.

Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 02:25:30 UTC No. 16279729

>>16279336
>>16279364
These. OP is a salty midwit.

raspberry pie at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 02:37:03 UTC No. 16279736

>>16279328
/thread
aka tards being tards

Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 02:43:07 UTC No. 16279744

>>16279317
The saying arose to combat poorly done studies which would simply show a graph of some data, throw in a line of best fit, to allow them to conclude whatever claim suited them. This sort of practice is incredibly common in the fields of medicine, pharmacology and psychology, and why those fields are now such a joke.
You demonstrate causation by coming up with some theory which describes the mechanism of causation, finding evidence which agrees with said theory (including the correlation among other things), and moreover, doing everything you can to find counterexamples to the theory and still failing to find one. Then have your colleagues try and fail to find counterexamples to prove your theory wrong.
Once all of this has been done, you may establish your theory, and claim that there might be a causation.

>>16279670
Slippery slope is indeed a logical fallacy. The problem is that retards think that "logical fallacy"="fallacy". Humans are not logical beings, so any argument pertaining to humans ought to take into account more than just logic, in particular human nature. Frequently, the slippery slope argument is a good one; it is not based in logic, rather on human nature, and only an absolute idiot would position it as an argument based in logic.

Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 03:11:40 UTC No. 16279773

>>16279328
Yep, it was supposed to be:

> Correlation does not imply causation

Which means

> Correlation does not always mean causation

But since we don’t teach logic in high school and just act like “imply” means “equal to” in ordinary language, it became:

> Correlation does not equal causation

Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 12:18:21 UTC No. 16280187

>>16279670
Just the tip, but only for a minute.