[AntonioLao]

The phrase ‘politically correct’ signifies an adherence to typically progressive approved forms of belief and practice on issues involving race, gender, sexual affinity, or ecology. The phrase ‘scientifically correct’ signifies attachment to the scientific method wherever and whenever a research is conducted by the following ordered sequence of steps: (1) identifying the problem, (2) relevant data are collected, (3) a hypothesis is formulated from these data, (4) and finally the hypothesis is empirically tested. The phrase ‘statistically correct’ combined the best of worlds: politically and scientifically.

Since statistics is defined as a science of data, these data can be categorical (political) or numerical (scientific). There is no sharp dividing line. In fact these distinct data types are mixed and used to derive inferences or logical conclusions about anything or everything. The first to apply the categorical approach was Darwin in his theory of evolution for all life on earth. The first to apply the numerical approach was Newton for his 3 laws of motion and his universal law of gravitation. Some historical contributors to both approaches included Legendre who developed the method of least squares, Gauss, Laplace, Fermat, Pascal, Huygens, Leibniz, Jakob and Johann Bernoulli, and Arbuthnot in probability. Between 1700 and 1900 these approaches were applied to astronomy, geodesy, psychology, biology, and social sciences. The numerical approach effected Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics in classical mechanics. In quantum mechanics, this effected Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac quantum statistics for two species of elementary particles: bosons and fermions.

[dleviwing]

Antonio;
Are you attempting to infer that measuring the number of opinions on a topic and then categorizing them is “science”? I usually view this as a misappropriation of the word “science”; it’s like the oxymoron of saying "the science of religion" or "the study of religion is a science". Those are the fallacies we need to overcome if scientific progress is one of our goals.

[mkirkpatrick]

I have a healthy disrespect for statistics,and usually ignore them!




regards michael.

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick

statistics,... usually ignore them!

Isn't that statistically impossible you bloody Pom ??

cool bananas ... greg

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Graybeard

Isn't that statistically impossible you bloody Pom ??

cool bananas ... greg

Gregemodous my son,hearken to a bit of Turkish wisdom,If statistics suggested that
98% of alcoholics had a drink problem,would you believe them?



regards michael.

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick

If statistics suggested that
98% of alcoholics had a drink problem, would you believe them?

Only if they were sober at the time .... rotflmao .....

cool bananas old buddy ...... greg

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by dleviwing

Are you attempting to infer that measuring the number of opinions on a topic and then categorizing them is “science”?

Absolutely, no. Relatively, yes. Since a category is the same as an absolute and numeral is the same as cardinality or measure of a smallest and a biggest quantity or near and far.