Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Yes on the relationship, no on the direction of causality


sort by: page size:

Might not be a causality relationship though.

But is it a causal relationship?

I think the causality is more in the other direction.

Are you sure that's the direction causality runs?

I don't think causality has been demonstrated, no?

True, but the article makes the point that the causality doesn't go only one way.

I never implied a causal relationship, they are two sides of the same coin.

No, it's evidence that they are correlated, not causal.

That's not a causal relationship.

Well correlation has not direction of causality, but I get your point.

Although not sure why you see it that way, seems easier to explain the other way around to me.


No, one implies a causality that the other doesn't.

Where did I mention any causality?

Correlation is not causality.

Correlation does not equal causality.

There's a connection -- but whether it's a valid, proven, causal connection is another matter.

Fair enough. But what about the causality issue?

Who's implying that causal relationship when the contrary is just as likely?

Correlation does not imply causation, however. There could be a more complex relationship between the two than direct causality.

Correlation does not imply causality...
next

Legal | privacy