Let me break this shit down with an analogy we can all understand because hip-hop/rap is what brings us all here, right?
If little Jimmy has rich parents that live in an affluent neighborhood, it's possible he could listen to all this molly/lean/drug rap and it has 0 effect on him because he doesn't relate to that world, so he has no need to act on the messages he hears in the music.
By that SAME token, it's completely possible Jimmy starts poppin molly, drinking lean, etc and it fucks him up.. The difference is he has a wealthy support system backing him, that can pay for the proper treatment, thus saving him from becoming a statistic.
If you're some kid growing up in the hood in ATL, listening to artists that came from your area, or from a similar upbringing talking about do X,Y,Z..that's relatable to your circumstances. Younger kids that don't have fully developed brains are more impressionable and more likely to emulate the shit they hear coming from someone they relate to.
Except this is lil Jamal in the hood who doesn't have affluent parents to fall back on for support. So he's more likely to become a statistic
By that same token, there's kids in the hood in ATL that are unaffected by the messages in music and they overcome incredible odds to become college graduates with good grades and all.
And it's a known fact rappers are told to promote certain shit in their music because that type of shit has been exposed several times by several artists in the industry.
Do you see how correlations work now? Just because the kid in ATL went and did molly, lean, etc doesn't imply CAUSATION because another kid in ATL overcame odds to graduate college. But there's still a correlation
---------- Post added at 09:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:49 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggo
Sounds like the stuff I did in my statistics 1 class in community college.
Aldi, by your definition there are infinite correlations so you've watered down your argument to nothing.
|
I highly doubt your community college statistics class had you spend hundreds of dollars on IBM SPSS software. There's levels to this shit. I'd probably show up to class high and half asleep and ace a Stats 1 class
---------- Post added at 10:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:50 AM ----------
Actually I have a good analogy along the lines of the Asian shit Eth said..
You can prove there's correlations just by making graphs. It's just you guys are making horrible analogies with junk variables/junk data
If I wanted to prove African Americans are behind more violent crimes than any other group in Chicago, I'd run an analysis on African Americans, Hispanics, Caucasians, etc on the X axis
With the total number of crimes that occured in Chicago for the year of 2016 at the top of the Y axis with a good interval that'll reflect nicely on the graph. So if there were 1,000 crimes maybe intervals of 100 or 200 would nicely display which ethnicities were responsible for X amount of crimes.
With this data the graph would show you the correlation. If African Americans were responsible for 400 of those crimes, or 40%, with another ethnic group placing 2nd at 25%..
Does this imply causation? Does it imply African Americans are all violent savages? No. But it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt there's a correlation between African Americans and crime in Chicago.
The causation would require further analysis