Quote:
Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
No. However, I was struck by the irony of his writing a front-cover blurb for Steven Leavitt's book --- a book whose primary point is that the conventional wisdom is wrong and this can be proven only by performing complicated regression analysis on other economists' raw data. Maybe "Blink" is a nickname for a Cray supercomputer somewhere in Chicago.
|
My first reaction to Gladwell and Leavitt was “huh, two guys trying to prove their points by engaging in exactly the endeavors they criticize.” But that’s a dishonest dismissal. Gladwell acknowledges the contradiction by saying the book is meant to entertain, and that, because people are so accustomed to having the reasons behind any decision vetted from every conceivable angle and spoon fed to them, he needs to cite tons of examples to prove his point. I haven’t read all of Freakonomics, but from what I have, I don’t think Leavitt’s saying “statistical studies are generally bullshit.” Isn’t he saying most statistical studies are bullshit because they’re no done completely enough or they’re manuevered to reflect the bias of the group paying for the study?
