Re: Randomness & Purpose [wasRe: Piecemeal genetic differences as support for macroe

From: billwald@juno.com
Date: Sun Sep 17 2000 - 20:26:35 EDT

  • Next message: Bertvan@aol.com: "Great posts"

    Dear Marcio

    BU.EDU = Boston U? Good hocky team this year?

    >Also, I might be wrong, but it seems to me that scientists usually don't
    >use this distinction between probability and statistics while using an
    >hypothetical-deductive method. Imagine an experiment to test the effect
    >of some drug. They would use probability to establish the working and
    the
    >alternative hypothesis, but afterwards they would analyse the results
    >using statistics. If the distiction you suggest is really important in
    >this case, someone could say that they can't really state anything
    >about the outcome of the experiment because it is a "historical
    >singularity" and all one could say about it (mathematically) is that it
    >happened.

    Yes, This is correct if the sample size was 1. They could only conclude
    that the
    effect of the drug on this one person was . . . . They could come to a
    different - a more meaningful conclusion - if the sample size was 10,000.

    Say the drug was released and it was expected that 5% would experience a
    particular side effect. After the first 10,000 people bought the drug 95%
    of them got the side effect. What do we conclude? God's will because we
    calculated 5%?

    We only know about one universe and it contains life. For sure, we only
    know about one planet and it contains life. A mathematical - historical
    singularity.

    billwald@juno.com

    ________________________________________________________________
    YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
    Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
    Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
    http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 17 2000 - 20:04:12 EDT