I cannot supply those. If you are looking to win something, you won it. If you are looking to participate in a non-competitive collective learning process, this is mainly personal anecdotes, anecdotes from others, and somewhere between opinion and expert opinion. Say, “experienced opinion”. These are fairly weak Bayesian evidences. But I don’t have stronger ones supporting other hypotheses.
The issue is, my reasoning is usually very motivated. My modus operandi is to feel a strong sense of compassion to help groups of people whose life sucks and simply not accept “don’t know” for an answer. Rather, I go for the least badly evidenced helpful hypothesis and explore it. These are the least badly evidenced ones. Not well evidenced ones.
I think it is like two curves meeting on a graph. How strongly you are motivated to help is how weak an evidence you accept for the least badly evidenced hypothesis to explore it. It is like doctors trying a treatment with 5% chance of success to save a dying patient, because there is no better one around.
The issue is, my reasoning is usually very motivated. My modus operandi is to feel a strong sense of compassion to help groups of people whose life sucks and simply not accept “don’t know” for an answer. Rather, I go for the least badly evidenced helpful hypothesis and explore it. These are the least badly evidenced ones.
You don’t help people by deluding yourself and have an inaccurate map of reality.
Understanding a system in depth is very useful if you want to change it.
Personal experience can often be useful, but when reading your original comment I didn’t get the impression you were doing a good job separating what you have learned from personal experience and what you’re just guessing about. All of it is your least bad evidence, yes, but some of it is a lot worse than others. I think Mac did a good job highlighting some of your claims. What is your degree of confidence in each one individually? How do I compare the likely accuracy of claim 1 vs. claim 10?
However, I was curious why you made these bold claims, and I think you provided an answer: you have not yet found sufficient evidence to change the opinion you formed from anecdotal accounts. I suggest you search in the following areas to gather more evidence about your claims:
Claim 1 - Educational achievement data
Claims 2, 5, and 8 - Economic data
Claim 3 - Government budget data
Claim 4 - Polls
Claims 2, 6 - Not sure. Change in average IQ scores of those studying to become a teacher?
Claim 7 - Court records
Claim 9 - Investigative reports
Claim 10 - Not sure. Probably an economic paper on this.
Furthermore, you believe that taking any action is better than the current status quo. I cannot say with certainty this isn’t true. However, I believe things could be worse, so I don’t believe any change is guaranteed to yield an improvement. The patient might not be dying, and an inappropriate treatment could kill him/her.
I cannot supply those. If you are looking to win something, you won it. If you are looking to participate in a non-competitive collective learning process, this is mainly personal anecdotes, anecdotes from others, and somewhere between opinion and expert opinion. Say, “experienced opinion”. These are fairly weak Bayesian evidences. But I don’t have stronger ones supporting other hypotheses.
The issue is, my reasoning is usually very motivated. My modus operandi is to feel a strong sense of compassion to help groups of people whose life sucks and simply not accept “don’t know” for an answer. Rather, I go for the least badly evidenced helpful hypothesis and explore it. These are the least badly evidenced ones. Not well evidenced ones.
I think it is like two curves meeting on a graph. How strongly you are motivated to help is how weak an evidence you accept for the least badly evidenced hypothesis to explore it. It is like doctors trying a treatment with 5% chance of success to save a dying patient, because there is no better one around.
You don’t help people by deluding yourself and have an inaccurate map of reality. Understanding a system in depth is very useful if you want to change it.
Personal experience can often be useful, but when reading your original comment I didn’t get the impression you were doing a good job separating what you have learned from personal experience and what you’re just guessing about. All of it is your least bad evidence, yes, but some of it is a lot worse than others. I think Mac did a good job highlighting some of your claims. What is your degree of confidence in each one individually? How do I compare the likely accuracy of claim 1 vs. claim 10?
I am not looking to win.
However, I was curious why you made these bold claims, and I think you provided an answer: you have not yet found sufficient evidence to change the opinion you formed from anecdotal accounts. I suggest you search in the following areas to gather more evidence about your claims:
Claim 1 - Educational achievement data
Claims 2, 5, and 8 - Economic data
Claim 3 - Government budget data
Claim 4 - Polls
Claims 2, 6 - Not sure. Change in average IQ scores of those studying to become a teacher?
Claim 7 - Court records
Claim 9 - Investigative reports
Claim 10 - Not sure. Probably an economic paper on this.
Furthermore, you believe that taking any action is better than the current status quo. I cannot say with certainty this isn’t true. However, I believe things could be worse, so I don’t believe any change is guaranteed to yield an improvement. The patient might not be dying, and an inappropriate treatment could kill him/her.
Edit: formatting again