(June 1, 2018 at 2:51 pm)ohreally Wrote: Thanks for indulging me. Ok to make an analogy, using something else that some people believe to be true: The evidence for no relationship between the location of stars when your are born and personality is that the average personality of any randomly selected person from different astrological signs always shows difference in personality of less than magnitude of statistical uncertainty.
But normally don't we just say there is no evidence for astrology. Or no evidence that stars locations when you are born impact your personality. So if someone said well what makes you think that stars and personality aren't related, what's your evidence? I would think I don't have any evidence, but technically I should say let me present you with my evidence of (see my above analogy).
Just like I would say there is no evidence that race impacts your IQ, in a non technical way but I could say in a more technical way that my evidence is that (your last sentence above that i've quoted).
Just touching on the astrology example (i'm not familiar enough with race/IQ research to make any statement), you're right. Colloquially we'll just say "there's no evidence that the stars affect your personality." If someone asks you "why do you believe the stars don't affect our personality?", you could alternatively say that there isn't enough evidence to overturn the null hypothesis...but that might not fit well in casual conversation. You could also say that all of the available evidence regarding the position of the stars and peoples' personalities does not indicate any causal (or even correlative, in this case) relationship.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
- Thomas Jefferson