Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang

IV. Ethics
old adag, widly itd and oftn misattriutd
An
Mark Twain, is “Thr ar thr kinds of lis:
to
damnd lis, and statistis”. This stion taks
lis,
losr look at th impliations of knowldg
a
drdging is on xampl of a statistial
Data
with murky this. It involvs th
prati
sanning of larg data sts for
spulativ
without having a prdfind
orrlations,
Sin a 95% onfidn intrval is
hypothsis.
usd, maning a 5% han of finding
usually
orrlation twn ompltly random
a
spurious yt statistially signifiant
varials,
ar almost rtainly found. On ovious
rsults
is that any hypothsis found using data
solution
must tstd against anothr data st
drdging
usd in th original drdging.
not
w may not s any rason to qustion
Oftn,
and statistial vidn. Most of th
orrlations
as non-xprts, w may not hav th skills
tim,
dig dpr, and must instad valuat th
to
of xprts to prform in th funtion
rdiility
puli intlltuals.
of
paradox is a phnomnon in
Simpson’s
and statistis in whih a trnd that
proaility
in svral diffrnt data groups rvrss or
xists
whn th groups ar omind, du
disappars
a “lurking” varial (also alld a onfounding
to
that is not aountd for. This paradox
varial)
how orrlations an distortd y
rvals
rrors, and th dangr in making
sampling
th xampl shown in Tal 11.1:
Considr
Univrsity of California, Brkly 1973
th
11.1 shows that mn appar mor likly
Tal
womn to admittd to th univrsity,
than
an admissions ias. Howvr, on
indiating
admissions rats y dpartmnts,
analysing
trnd rvrss, and it appars that mor
th
(A, B, D and E: s Tal 11.2)
dpartmnts
a ias in favour of admitting womn. Th
had
and orrtd data showd a “small ut
poold
signifiant ias in favor of womn”
statistially
et al 1975).
(Bikl
B 860 63% 25 68%
D 417 33% 375 35%
E 191 28% 393 24%
F 373 6% 341 7%
paradox ariss from th fat that mn
Th
to dpartmnts suh as nginring
applid
hmistry that had fwr appliants
and
highr admission rats, whras womn
and
to dpartmnts with a gratr numr
applid
appliants and a lowr rat of admission. Of
of
th laim of a statistially signifiant
ours,
in favour of womn dos not nssarily
ias
thr was a pratial ias in favour of
man
womn.
paradox itslf is xplaind in th TED-Ed
Th
linkd hr.
vido
trms: Liddll How
Sarh
an mislading
statistis
11
IV.2 The trouble with statistics
admissions statistis.
Women
Men
Applicants Admitted Applicants Admitted
Total 8442 44% 4321 35%
drivd from statistis and th authority it arris.
Table 11.1 Univrsity of California, Brkly: admissions 1973
(Bikl t al 1975)
Women
Men
Department
Applicants Admitted Applicants Admitted
A 825 66% 108 82%
C 325 37% 593 34%
Table 11.2 Dat for dirnt dpartmnts (Bikl et al 1975)
ausal intrprtations of orrlations.
350