Michael Smith writes: >One funny thing in Allen's post was: "...who regards himself >as “about as anti-inequality an economist as you’ll find”)..." >Well I guess that settles that. This is proof positive that God >exists. We have at last found a truly objective (unbiased) >individual who is, miraculously, a government worker !!
Of course nowhere does Andrew Leigh remotely suggest or imply that his contribution is truly objective or unbiased when he prefaced his critical comment with “I’m about as anti-inequality an economist as you’ll find”. Michael has completely misconstrued the point of his doing so. Leigh knows that a standard response to criticism of a thesis such as that of Wilkinson and Pickett is that they come from the political Right, and are ideologically biased, so what do you expect? And indeed that is precisely what we find from Wilkinson – he castigates critiques as coming from “right wing institutes” that he describes as “professional wreckers of ideas”: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/aug/14/the-spirit-level-equality-thinktanks As for Leigh being “a government worker”, that is a rather strange way of describing a Labor member of the Australian House of Representatives. Michael’s implied notion (Leigh is “miraculously, a government worker!!”) that this fact goes some way (at least) to explaining his critical comments on Wilkinson & Pickett’s thesis defies logical explanation. >I think Chris made a good point that it is a popular book and >so perhaps focuses on readability. Perhaps you should have read the lengthier academic reviews. Then you would have seen that the criticisms were not simply based on the book. >And for it's critics to point out that it doesn't present >detailed statistical analyses, is I think, ludicrous. >It isn't after all, a journal article. So a comment by one critic has metamorphosed into a generalised “critics”. And to reiterate my comment immediately above, the lengthier reviews were not simply directed at the book but were on W&P’s thesis more generally, as the authors have expounded it elsewhere. >But the most hillarious one is from one critics response that >Allen presents that includes: >"The evidence presented in the book is mostly a series of >scatter diagrams, with a regression line drawn through them." Michael conveniently leaves out from the quotation: “If you remove the bold lines from the diagram, the pattern of points mostly looks random, and the data dominated by a few outliers." Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London allenester...@compuserve.com http://www.esterson.org --------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Smith <tipsl...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: The joy of stats Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 09:35:47 -0600 I think I'll try to match Allen's lengthy response. I haven't read it (The Spirit Level) either (although I think I have it somewhere and have been planning to). I think Chris made a good point that it is a popular book and so perhaps focuses on readability. This, however, doesn't mean the analysis is poor. And for it's critics to point out that it doesn't present detailed statistical analyses, is I think, ludicrous. It isn't after all, a journal article. But the best part of Allen's response is the funny parts. One funny thing in Allen's post was: "...who regards himself as “about as anti-inequality an economist as you’ll find”)..." Well I guess that settles that. This is proof positive that God exists. We have at last found a truly objective (unbiased) individual who is, miraculously, a government worker !! But the most hillarious one is from one critics response that Allen presents that includes: "The evidence presented in the book is mostly a series of scatter diagrams, with a regression line drawn through them." This is hillarious !!! The reason being, of course, is that the statement is a good description of all the results in sociology. I'm still laughing at that one. Thanks Allen. --Mike --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7269 or send a blank email to leave-7269-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
