Calling Bullshit 10.2: Reductio Ad Absurdum
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- The method of reductio ad absurdum, in which an argument’s methods are shown to lead to ridiculous conclusions, is extremely powerful for refuting bullshit claims. We examine statistical projections of gold medal 100 meter times and the cognitive-emotional responses of a dead salmon.
May 31, 2017
Course: INFO 198 / BIOL 106B. University of Washington
Instructors: Carl T. Bergstrom and Jevin West
Synopsis: Our world is saturated with bullshit. Learn to detect and defuse it.
The course will be offered as a 1-credit seminar this spring through the Information School at the University of Washington. We aim to expand it to a 3 or 4 credit course for 2017-2018. For those who cannot attend in person, we aim to videotape the lectures this spring and make video clips freely available on the web.
callingbullshit...
/ callin_bull
callinBS
bullsht.course@gmail.com
Information School ischool.uw.edu/
Department of Biology www.biology.wa...
Video edited by Bum Mook Oh
Music by Chris Zabriskie: Prelude No.7
Thanks a lot. You have just ruined 3 years of research and my PhD in Post-mortem Ickthyological Cognition.
Haha
I think that was a joke there.
*laughs confidently*
Or one more data point?
@@bittyshottoms1007
Cleep it Kean.
great video but those snorting sounds that one of those guys is making is freaking annoying
Thank you for such clear and simple illustration using these different examples, beautiful to watch this lecture.
There's no problem with the 100 metres race extrapolation. It's quite reasonable to postulate that the athletes will, ultimately, get to the finish line before they set off. Essentially, this is proof that time travel is our destiny.
If you prolong the graph of running times ... oh they said it.
There are limits to this type of argument. Some statements are neither true nor false. Even more commonly, some statements cannot be shown to be either true or false. Reductio ad absurdum works well for very rigorous mathematical statements based on deductive reasoning...not so much for loosely formulated concepts such as statements made by humans. The classic example is the following statement: “This statement is false.” Reductio ad absurdum will lead you to the conclusion that it is true...or false...dependent upon where you start the “proof.” You might argue that this example is absurd, but I counter that the example of plotting time vs. time to show time doesn’t change is no less absurd. (As a side note, reductio ad absurdum is a favorite of mine, so I’m not knocking it’s utility. I’m only saying that deliberate misuse of the technique may help you win an argument with a lesser opponent, but it won’t get you closer to any truth. Deliberate misuse of the technique only helps you if you assume you already know the truth.)
In 2021, during the pandemic, scientists in the UK were arguing for a lockdown in the run up to Christmas. With their modelling they said that the omicron strain looked to double it’s death toll every day. This was at the end of November. Based on the modelling, it was shown to the government scientists that every single person in Britain would be dead by Christmas Day. A classic case of reductio ad absurdum when taken to its logical conclusion.
I'm gonna place a bet on the first sub-zero hundred meters to happen in the 27th century and continue to use sloppy maths, thank you very much
The samon look so tasty. Did they eat afterwords?
Good explenation, I really enjoyed it, thnx!
A highlighter tool? Brightness adjusted...
“The National Review”...
Per absurdum, signicado.
wow...it only tells me the model fails in 600 years ..not that it has failed today