I’ve chided rationalists on this before but nearly every intellectual is guilty of taking words with a formal definition and abusing them as metaphors.“Correlated with” almost always means “weakly causatively related” and almost never literally “correlated with” Rigor is a spook
-
-
I’m not sure what you mean. I’m just reporting how I see people use and interpret “correlated with”, the fact that it’s misunderstood widely is exactly my point.
-
I was stuck on "correlated with almost always . . ." Hmm
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.