Correlation may not imply causation—but it is highly correlated with causation! In fact, the most likely theory is that correlation causes causation… ;-)
If A causes B, then artificially inducing A results in (or increases the frequency of, etc.) B. I am not really sure what you are trying to say, nor what “most likely theory” here means (under what setup?)
I realize you are being glib, but this is important!
If A causes B, then artificially inducing A results in (or increases the frequency of, etc.) B. I am not really sure what you are trying to say, nor what “most likely theory” here means (under what setup?)
My impression was that it was an absurdity for the purpose of satire.
Correlation may not imply causation—but it is highly correlated with causation! In fact, the most likely theory is that correlation causes causation… ;-)
That last sentence? Ow.
If A causes B, then artificially inducing A results in (or increases the frequency of, etc.) B. I am not really sure what you are trying to say, nor what “most likely theory” here means (under what setup?)
I realize you are being glib, but this is important!
Rupert Sheldrake has a theory of how correlation causes causation.
My impression was that it was an absurdity for the purpose of satire.
It is what’s known as a joke—it has no hidden wisdom or meaning.
I think part of what is amusing here is that this joke is a serious theory for some folks.
Like Rupert Sheldrake?