Re: Re: IQ Increase

Very fine capsule.  Very much agreed. 

There is no real substitute for what you test out in your
own experience, and 
its even better if others have tested it out and had the
same results in 
their experience.  

More generally, though, we might want to take into account
the analysis by 
some cultural anthropologists, who classify all human
cultures into three types, 
based on their value system and underlying main philosophy. 
Ours would be 
regarded as the "Sensate" type - truth and value
are found through the senses, 
hence our premium on experimental evidence.  Next in line is
the Intuitive type 
- that truth and value are best found through some form of
inner knowing.  
Next in line, before progressing back into Sensate, is the
Rational - truth and 
value are what make sense through reasoning.  In Sorokin's
Cultural And Social 
Dynamics (popular trade book version, The Crisis of Our Age)
which despite 
some perceived shortcomings continues to hold my respect
because so much of what 
this former long-term president of the U.S. Sociological
Association 
predicted has been borne out, each of these three phases
starts out highly creative 
and then goes sour and corrupt, leading either to the next
phase or to society's 
collapse.  There is a case for the possibility that you need
all three legs 
working on the pianostool in order for society to be kept
creatively 
productive, and that no idea or theory should be regarded as
a paradigm until it tests 
right, it feels right AND its case or argument makes
widely-agreed sense.   
...win 

In a message dated 2/16/2007 9:29:16 PM Eastern Standard
Time, 
johniusgenius.ucsd.edu writes:

>  Evidence falls into four categories:
> 
> 1. Testimonial
>   * people who will say that X works, Y ought to be
done, Z is good, etc.
>   * celebrities, movie stars, professional athletes,
etc.
>   * highly unreliable, testimony abundantly available
for almost any claim
>   * "I went to Mexico and they shot me up with XYZ
and I feel great.
>    My cancer melted away, my arches rose, my bunions
decamped, and 
>    lights went on in my head"
>   * never includes people who tried X without receiving
the benefit, 
>    or those who didn't try X but received the benefit
anyway
>   * if one accepts testimonial evidence, one will end
up believing just
>    about anything
>   * it isn't necessarily/inherently wrong, but almost
impossible to evaluate
>   * another example: "clinical anecdote",
where a doctor develops an opinion
>    or subjective guess based on his/her experience,
without controls
>    "My clinical experience is patients seem to
benefit from drug Z"
>   * favorite tool of faddists, charlatans,
know-nothings, etc.
> 
> 2. Argumentative ("make a case for")
>   * gathering known facts X or experimental results Y,
and then reasoning 
>    from them that Z ought to be so
>   * uses logic to derive plausible-seeming inferences
>   * "exercise increases level of high-density
lipoproteins in blood,
>    these are usually associated with lower degree of
arteriosclerosis,
>    so exercise ought to increase resistance to heart
attacks"
>   * but making a plausible case for something is not
enough.  At best a
>    reasonable hypothesis is developed, but it must be
tested in the 
>    real world for validity
> 
> 3. Correlational
>   * events X and Y always or often occur together,
implying that there may
>    be a causal relationship between them or that both
are caused by event Z
>   * "nations whose citizens eat a high-fat diet
generally display a 
>    higher incidence of heart disease than low-fat
nations"
>   * often useful, to generate reasonable-sounding
guesses, but it's not 
>    actual proof
> 
> 4. Experimental
>   * repeatable trials, usually with controls
>   * under appropriate conditions, do X, and Y always
happens. When
>    another investigator somewhere else does the same,
the same result
>    is produced
>   * the only kind of evidence acceptable as
"proof" of a hypothesis
>   * done well, establishes causal relationship between
two phenomena
>   * "Repeatedly confirmed experiments in my
laboratory and in many other
>    laboratories have proved that cutting down calories
plus increasing
>    the quality of the diet produces very lean,
extremely healthy animals,
>    greatly extends their maximum lifespans, and keeps
them young both
>    in appearance and in physical and intellectual
performance."
> 
> 
>  Argument and noted correlations can be used to
construct hypotheses,
> point research into likely productive directions,
indicate how one might
> proceed in testing the hypotheses, etc., but they are
insufficient in and
> of themselves to establish "truth" or
"proof".
> 
>  Extensive correlations and well-conceived and
implemented experiments,
> together constitute the most solid evidence for various
theoretical
> statements, claims, proposals, etc.
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank e-mail from the
address you subscribed under to: 

       imagestream-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://gro
ups.yahoo.com/group/imagestream/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http:/
/groups.yahoo.com/group/imagestream/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:imagestream-digest@yahoogroups.com 
    mailto:imagestream-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    imagestream-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.c
om/info/terms/