|Simpson’s Paradox: is an expression for a problem when evaluating statistical results when these results can be summarized in different ways. Depending on the division into groups, different statements can be obtained from the same data, which can even contradict itself. (The problem was named after E.H. Simpson, “The Interpretation of Interaction in Contingency Tables”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Ser., Vol. 13, 1951, pp. 238-241). See also reference class problem, indeterminacy, stage migration, statistics._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Simpson's Paradox/Cartwright: E.g. Exercise prevents cancer even in smokers. - It may be that the risk reduction through exercise is greater than the cause by smoking. Paradox: that exercise seems to cause cancer - i.e. in the case, when smoking and exercising are highly enough correlated in the population. - Solution: form subgroups - In the whole group smoking seems no more harmful - but important argument: in both subgroups: athletes and non-athletes - E.g. Salmon: a cause does not necessarily increase the probability of its effect.
Causally homogeneous: if all or no one work out, exercise cannot be correlated with cancer.
Better: law "uranium causes radioactivity", then no matter whether polonium present.
If the third factor is causally irrelevant to E, then there is no reason to keep it fixed, and fixing it even provides a false evaluation of causes and strategies. - E.g. The university seemed to reject women more often. - Solution: division into departments. - Women applied more in subjects with higher rejection rate. (E.g. medicine) - Problem: the partition variable is arbitrary: in roller skating more women would have been rejected. ((s) if the actually Rejected in that subject had been looked at)._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
How the laws of physics lie Oxford New York 1983
A Neglected Theory of Truth. Philosophical Essays, Cambridge/MA pp. 71-93
Theories of Truth, Paul Horwich, Aldershot 1994
Ontology and the theory of meaning Chicago 1954