OK fellas,
I am going to imagine what Sabri could have meant. JD's are not the the only perspectives on how we can treat statistics, government or otherwise. Yes, even statistics are subject to perspective, numbers may be objective but their presentation has its purposes. Here are some alternative attitudes about statistics which arise from my own experiences:
- we can recognize that statistics can be manipulated in order to shape public opinion
disease x." "Crime is up 16% over the past ten years" vs. "crime is down 5% in the past
two years" --both of these last two statements can be true at once and used to encourage
differing opinions regarding what to do about crime.
- we can realize that the government has its own agenda and that the statistics the government releases and the way those statistics are handled will reflect that agenda.
- we can realize that statistics don't mean much when the point is to build a better world beginning with your own here and now. If you donate blood to a white male victim of a freak accident in Pittsburgh you have saved a valuable life. If you donate blood to save the 9004th Iraqi victim of cluster bombing you have saved a valuable life. If everyone would simply do what they can to make the world a better place then it would be ridiculous to prioritize according to quantifiables. People fulfill the needs with which they are presented no matter how those needs can be measured statistically.
Well, I hope I have gotten us a little closer to being able to meet Sabri half way. Too tired to keep writing.
Lisa S.
on 10/07/2002 9:35 PM, Devine, James at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like Doug, I don't get this, Sabri. What is the problem with using some (but not all) government statistics as a half-bad/half good way of understanding what's going on, in conjunction with other information and reasoning?
There seems to be a spectrum of positions on this debate. Which do you fit?
(1) we can reject all statistics, even as a part of a more complete analysis;
(2) we can reject all government statistics;
(3) we can accept some government statistics, suitably "massaged";
(4) we can accept some government statistics, but treat them critically;
(5) we can accept most government statistics, as a good estimate of what's going on in the phenomenal world;
(6) we can accept all government statistics as a good estimate of what's going on in the phenomenal world.
Perhaps there's a 7th position: we can accept all those statistics (government-produced or otherwise) that reinforce our pre-determined political position and rect all those which conflict with that position.
BTW, I fit under #3 or #4.
JD
-----Original Message-----
From: Sabri Oncu
To: PEN-L
Sent: 10/7/2002 6:12 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:31020] Re: employment
I said:
> Maybe I am just a dreamer, but I am not the only one!
After reading Jim's and Doug's comments, I came to the conclusion
that I am the only one.
This is sad, very sad.
Not best,
Sabri
