Indisputably, smoking causes lung cancer and various other deadly conditions. But the problematic relationship between correlation and causation in general remains an active area of debate and confusion. The “spurious correlations” compiled by Harvard law student Tyler Vigen and displayed on his website (tylervigen.com) should be a warning. Did you realise that consumption of margarine is strongly correlated with the divorce rate in Maine?
毋庸置疑,吸烟会导致肺癌和其他多种致命疾病。但广泛意义上的相关性与因果之间的尚存疑问的关系,仍是当前一个极易引起争议和混淆的领域。哈佛大学(Harvard)法学院学生泰勒•维根(Tyler Vige)编撰并发布在其网站(tylervigen.com)上的“伪相关”应算是一种警告。你知道缅因州人造奶油的消费量与离婚率之间存在很强的相关性吗?
We cannot rely on correlation alone, then. But insisting on absolute proof of causation is too exacting a standard (arguably, an impossible one). Between those two extremes, where does the right balance lie between trusting correlations and looking for evidence of causation?
所以,我们不能仅仅依赖相关性。但是,坚持为因果关系提供绝对证据就过于苛刻了(甚至是一种不可能达到的标准)。在这两个极端之间,如何在相信相关性与寻找因果证据之间达到合理的平衡呢?
Scientists, economists and statisticians have tended to demand causal explanations for the patterns they see. It’s not enough to know that college graduates earn more money — we want to know whether the college education boosted their earnings, or if they were smart people who would have done well anyway. Merely looking for correlations was not the stuff of rigorous science.
【吸烟与肺癌的关系真的有那么大吗】相关文章:
★ 生命中的小瞬间
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15