If you look into various techniques of so-called "causal inference" used by social scientists, you'll find cyclic graphs are conspicuous by their absence. See, for example, one of the most "general" of such techniques: Structural Equation Modeling <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_equation_modeling>
Now, it isn't like people are unaware of the need for cyclic graphs in modeling causality. They've been aware of this since the ancient Greeks. So what explains the conspicuous absence of cyclic graphs in the social sciences? Is it because its "hard" to come up with cyclic graph models? Poor POOOR little sociologists! We musn't expect too much of them since they, with Federal subsidies of academia, merely determine the GOD DAMNED SOCIAL EXPERIMENTS BEING IMPOSED ON HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF NON-CONSENTING HUMAN SUBJECTS BY THE SUPREME COURT'S MENDACIOUS INTERPRETATION OF THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE OF THE US CONSTITUTION. On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 8:05 PM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > You would disallow self-reference if you didn't want to describe the > world as it is. > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 7:47 AM stefan.reich.maker.of.eye via AGI > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Why would you disallow self-reference? > > Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + > participants + delivery options Permalink > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T6761a13445e5864b-Mf4e8df32555e1ca0190a94e5 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
