Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
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?
|
Do we really need a book to tell us that statistics lie? Oh, right, we probably do.
I'm going to finish Collapse tonight and I don't have a replacement book quite on tap. I ordered The World Is Flat from amazon and it hasn't arrived yet. Oh, wait, I do have that book about the MIT guys who broke Vegas. Problem solved.
By the way, for all you poker fans out there, two of my girlfriends and I will be playing in the WPT Legends of Poker Ladies' Night tournament at The Bicycle Club next Wednesday night. Winner of the tournament plays on the Ladies' Night WPT "final table" with the famous people. I'll let you know if you need to watch that. Maybe my friend will get her 4K's again.
