Researchers whose entire productive career have committed them to the supposition that all knowledge comes from the data cannot easily transfer allegiance to a totally alien paradigm, according to which extra data information is needed, in the form of man made, causal models of reality. Current machine learning thinking, which some describe as on steroids, is deeply entrenched in this self propelled ideology.Ten years from now, historians will be asking: How could scientific leaders of the time allow society to invest almost all its educational and financial resources in data fitting technologies and so little on data interpretation science? The Book of Why attempts to answer this dilemma by drawing parallels to historically similar situations where ideological impediments held back scientific progress. But the true answer, and the magnitude of its ramifications, will only be unravelled by in depth archival studies of the social, psychological and economical forces that are currently governing our scientific institutions.A related, yet perhaps more critical topic that came up in handling the COVID 19 pandemic, is the issue of personalized care.
When the tasks are purely predictive, model based methods are indeed not immediately necessary and deep neural networks perform surprisingly well. This is level 1 (associational) in the Ladder of Causation described in The Book of Why. In tasks involving interventions, however (level 2 of the Ladder), model based methods become a necessity.
The red pill and the red pilled people that buy into it see this as a zero sum game when it not, and feminism doesn get in the way just because there are obnoxious radicals in the mix on the side of feminism. The problem with this “good and bad on both sides” thing when you talking about one side that is overwhelmingly filled with those who are acting in bad faith to begin with like the red pill crowd versus a side that is seeking to simply be seen as and treated like human beings of equal standing to their male counterparts is that if there any truth to it to begin with, it still at best a misrepresentation of the reality. Further, while feminism seeks that equality, a big part of it is addressing issues that cause inequity regardless of gender or sex, so saying “feminism gets in the way of people trying to help men with regards to high suicide rates” because you might have some whackos that identify as feminists simply criticize it is such a childish copout.
“When I speak of freedom of expression, it is not a matter of holding divisive speeches. No ! The freedom that I claim is that of being able to question and criticise. The difference between Rwanda and all the other countries of the world is that we do not have the right to talk about our problems.