Good example of confirmation bias (to introduce more psychology into the
thread)?

On 17 June 2015 at 14:17, David Barbour <dmbarb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:43 AM, spir <denis.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Have you noticed the official retraction of "the camel has 2 humps", a
>> good comment bu "retraction watch" on that fact, and that very "smart"
>> (lol) paper by Jeff Atwood (of coding horror) about the story:
>>
>
> Jeff Atwood's article is dated 2006, after the original paper. The
> retraction in 2014.
>
> That said, the original article was obviously bad science anyway. A simple
> alternative hypothesis to explain the same evidence: some people came into
> the class with more knowledge of programming, and the teacher allowed the
> others to fall further behind.
>
>
>>
>> My comment: How easy it is to confirm our ideologies (here meritocracy =
>> elitism = aristocracy) by scientific research (or what we call so).
>
>
> Not just scientific evidence or data. People tend to read whatever
> interpretation they want into scripture and anything else. The difference
> is that science demands empirical evidence that can be independently
> studied, and falsifiable theories, such that 'bad science' is less likely
> to survive from one generation to another.
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PPIG Discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to ppig-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to ppig-discuss@googlegroups.com.
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG 
Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ppig-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to ppig-discuss@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to