Correlation is not Causation
Notes
Claim
As David Hume said, we tend too quickly to assume causality between things even though causality is not something that we can directly observe. We have to remember that two things that go together aren't necessarily correlated.
Explanation
Since all of these cases are possible, we can't assume causation:
- A -> B (A causes B)
- B -> A (B causes A)
- C -> A & B (A third thing C causes both A and B)
- Random chance (these things acted as correlated up to now, but might no be so in the future)
Causality is not something that exist in the material world in a sense that we can overserve it, measure it, quantify it. It is not like molecules, atoms or colors Everything in the world is a natural phenomenon. There is no "causality" particle. Rather, causality is a relationship between physical materials which together form a phenomenon Systems thinking reveals mechanisms enabling effective change.
Why it matters
The existence of Noise obscures truth with external interference and confusion and Randomness prevents us from being accurate in our assessments of causality, even if it truly exists. Whenever we encounter someone who presents a correlation = causation argument, we should be skeptic of their argument. We have to resist the urge to see a connection where there's none.
Examples
When we see one ball hits the other, and immediately the second one begins to move, we interpret the hit of the first as the causal factor that has caused the second one to move. It is an act of Judgment adds subjective value to objective events. It might make sense for physical things, but gets more complicated when we switch to social science. There we might confuse Confusing current reality with how things should be blocks change, we might fall pray to using the current world as a justification for itself, which is an obvious bias.
Supporters
Opposers
Open questions
Visual
Overview
🔼Topic:: Selective Evidence ◀Origin:: David Hume 🔗Link::