Critical Thinking

Have cuts in the youth services caused the riots?

2011-08-11T15:35:00.000-07:00

“In da ghettos of Berkshire, right, you ain’t got nowhere to put da energy, ‘cos like apart from youth clubs, cinemas, theatres, sport centres, amusement arcades, football, school clubs, go-karting, dry-slope skiing, ice-skating, fishing, skate-boarding, Legoland, sea cadets, scouts, roller-discos, music workshops, oh yeah and swimming,… there ain’t nothin’ for kids to do.” – Ali G

Independence for London and the Home Counties?

2011-06-11T06:32:00.000-07:00

This is a tongue-in-cheek proposal but one which raises an important issue:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13661001

Why should the most prosperous region of the UK not declare its independence? Resentment is rising about the apparent injustice of south-eastern taxpayers funding benefits for Scotland and Wales such as free prescriptions, hospital parking and university education, while we have to put up with second-rate public services, not to mention the foreign aid budget (the UK's £70m donation to fight poverty in Uganda recently allowed the Ugandan President to spend £30m on a presidential jet).

Over the last 100 years, the number of nation states has increased as empires have fallen apart. Presently on the agenda, is the prospect of "independence for Scotland" and there is also the prospect of Belgium separating into its linguistic regions. These are simply the latest in a long process of separation to which no end is in sight. Any region which can claim a distinctive identity could claim the right to self-determination and a distinctive identity can easily be created where they do not really exist, as people in different regions turn to libraries to rediscover long dead languages, flags, anthems and numerous other traditions.

Yet these so-called "independent" states are not really independent as nineteenth century nation states were independent. An independent Scotland will want to be a member of the European Union, the IMF, the World Bank and about 200 other IGOs (International Governmental Organisations). While more and more "independent" countries have been created, more and more power has been given away by nation states to international bodies.

So we have the paradox of a rise of "identity politics" causing pressure for regions to want their own "identity" but also of globalisation requiring common solutions to common problems in a wide range of policy areas. After all, the most independent state in the world is probably North Korea.

What Alex Salmond probably craves is the title of President (or Prime Minister) of Scotland, cementing his place in history. This would mean that he could get to join a number of world leaders' clubs (how he must have wished that he too could be filmed playing table tennis with Barack Obama).

There is a valid concern that there is a fine line between celebrating identity and diversity and the more intolerant right-wing variety of "nationalism" which fails to properly recognise a common humanity. Modern identity politics increasingly emphasises difference based on arbitary factors of language, ethnicity and borders.

Furthermore, we have to recognise that as the nationalists seek to create smaller and smaller national units, the role for supranational bodies increases as issues such as immigration, the environment, international crime and the need to regulate the activities of multinational businesses make national borders an increasing irrelevance. Yet too often these IGOs have a serious democratic deficit, leading to problems of legitimacy and accountability. How can democracy be made to work internationally when it took about 2,000 years for democracy to make the transition from the city state to the nation state?

Will the Royal Wedding cause an Increase in Marriages? (post hoc)

2011-05-04T12:07:00.000-07:00

It can be predicted that there will shortly be a sharp increase in the number of marriages in the UK. When this happens, the press will almost certainly report that the "Kate and Will factor" must be the cause of the increase.

On last week's More or Less (Radio 4) it was explained that a similar phenomenon followed the marriage of David and Victoria Beckham with Posh and Becks being credited for causing a brief reversal in the long term decline of marriage.

A more likely explanation, however, is that shortly after the marriage of David and Victoria Beckham, the government announced a clampdown on "sham marriages" and people rushed to get married before the new regulations came into force. This legislation has now been ruled illegal under the Human Rights Act and the government will be shortly forced to lift the regulations, which can be expected to lead to an increase in marriages.

So any increase in marriage will probably have more to do with people seeking to beat the immigration rules rather than any royal inspiration.

Listen to More or Less:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b010mwbt#synopsis

Baby Joy for Jordan - appeal to history

2011-03-20T08:43:00.000-07:00

From Private Eye's Street of Shame Column (issue 1278)

"Baby Joy for Jordan" screamed The Star's headline on 14 December. The facts of the story were as follows: Jordan has changed from brunette to blonde. According to friends, when Jordan has been pregnant in the past, she has changed her hair colour. Therefore, she must be with child.

Home Cooking Raises Physics Take-up

2011-02-09T11:21:00.000-08:00

Should we expect better from the Times Educational Supplement?

Family meals have bigger impact than “superfoods”, research suggests

Fish oils, nuts and seeds have all been claimed to boost pupils’ brainpower - but a family meal is likely to have a bigger impact than “superfoods” when it comes to studying science, new research suggests.

Children who regularly eat with their families are 30 per cent more likely to take biology and physics at A-level than other pupils, according to a Government study.

Full report at: http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6069253

Junk food makes kids less brainy

2011-02-09T11:17:00.000-08:00

Eating junk food may be correlated with low IQ, but is this the same as saying that eating junk food causes low IQ? The Sun certainly seems to think so.

Story at: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3398102/Junk-food-makes-kids-less-brainy.html

Al Franken's Extended Ditch Analogy

2010-10-28T11:47:00.000-07:00

Obama says that the Republicans drove America into a ditch, so they shouldn't be given back the keys.

Senator Al Franken extends this analogy considerably:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR2GZ25tjQY

Targeted by Aliens

2010-10-28T04:11:00.000-07:00

"I have no doubt that I am being targeted by aliens," Radivoje Lajic told reporters outside his house in Gornji Lajjci (Bosnia). "They are playing games with me. Since 2007, my house has been hit six times by meteorites, and that defies all statistics. The chances of being hit once by a meteorite are so small that getting hit six times has to be deliberate. So I am clearly being targeted by extraterrestrials, but I don't know what I have done to annoy them."

"Experts at Belgrade University have confirmed that all the falling rocks are meteorits from outer space. The strikes always happen when it is raining heavily, never when there are clear skies, and for months I was unable to sleep whenever it rained, for fear of yet another strike. So I have now had my roof reinforced with steel girders, which I paid for by selling one of the meteorites to a university in the Netherlands. The scientists are now trying to work out what exactly it is about my house that attracts the meteorites but isn't it obvious? It's me."

Source: 24 Sata (Croatia) 19/7/2010

Reported in Private Eye's "Funny Old World" column

Do Daughters Cause Divorce?

2010-10-21T11:36:00.000-07:00

Another good correlation/causation possibility:

Apparently parents of daughters are more likely to get divorced than parents with sons. A possible explanation is that fathers of boys are more likely to stick around in an unhappy marriage, in order to be a male presence for their sons.

Read the report in Slate

Alex Ferguson's Strange Analogy

2010-10-21T11:33:00.000-07:00

Alex Ferguson on the Wayne Rooney Saga:

"Sometimes you look in a field and you see a cow and you think it’s a better cow than the one you’ve got in your own field. But it never really works out that way. It’s probably the same cow which is only as good as your own cow. We have to deal with that – some players like to think that it’s a better world somewhere else. It never really works like that."

Irrelevant Appeal to History - 2014 will determine the course of our century says Cambridge Professor

2010-06-17T11:23:00.000-07:00

Are you fed up hearing the much misquoted saying that "those who forget their history are condemned to repeat it"? Of course, there is much truth in the idea but it is not true that what has happened in the past will necessarily happen again. Sometimes things happen for the first time and sometimes things happen that never happen again.

According to the Daily Telegraph, a Cambridge Professor is claiming that dramatic events in 2014 will determine the course of our century because such events have happened in the middle of the second decade in the previous five centuries, for example the first world war broke out in 1914.

"Prof Boyle argues that 2014 will be important because previous five centuries have also hinged on events that took place in the middle of their second decade.

In 1517 Martin Luther nailed his theses to the door of Wittenburg church, sparking the Reformation and the rise of Protestantism.

A century later 1618 marked the start of the 30 Years War and decades of religious conflict in Western Europe, which ended with the establishment of the Hanoverians in 1715.

The enlightened Congress of Vienna took place in 1815 following the defeat of Napoleon, heralding a century of relative stability across Europe..

Prof Boyle, whose book 2014 - How to survive the next world crisis is published on Thursday, said: “The character of a century becomes very apparent in that second decade, so why should ours be any different?"

This seems a rather silly argument for a Cambridge Professor to be making. Could the Daily Telegraph, by any chance, be oversimplifying his thesis?

Telegraph article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7832724/2014-will-determine-course-of-century-says-Cambridge-professor.html

Not using screen wash in your car can cause Legionnaires Disease

2010-06-14T12:18:00.000-07:00

If you do not use screen wash in your car you are more likely to get Legionnaires disease than someone who does, according to a research by the Health Protection Agency. Bacteriology expert Prof Hugh Pennington

Many correlation and causation confusions are very silly indeed but this one is supported by someone whose expertise strengthens the claim.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8738000/8738281.stm

Is there any other possible explanation for the link?

Has Mount Everest Shrunk?

2010-06-04T09:04:00.000-07:00

The percentage of students achieving an A grade at A Level has increased for 27 years in a row, so A Levels must be getting easier.

Professor Gordon Stobart of the University of London responds with an intriguing analogy. In 1953 only two people got to the top of Mount Everest (and we know them well) yet today lots of people climb Mount Everest. There was a day in 1996 when 39 people stood together on the summit. So should we conclude that Mount Everest has shrunk? The evidence is actually that the mountain is now 26 ft higher than it was in 1953.

So maybe we should not be asking whether Mount Everest has got smaller but rather what has happened to mountaineering in the last 50 years. Modern climbers have better maps, guides, training and equipment. Similarly, it could be the case that examination results have improved not because the standard of the qualifications has been reduced but rather because of what has happened to education (better teaching, better equipment, and so on).

This comes from an excellent debate hosted by Cambridge Assessment, which is archived at:
http://www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/ca/Viewpoints/Viewpoint?id=132622

Brush teeth twice a day 'to prevent heart disease'

2010-06-04T08:32:00.000-07:00

Research has found that people who brush their teeth less than twice a day are "70% more likely to develop heart disease."

The findings are published in the British Medical Journal and were reported by many news organisations but, as usual, some were less careful than others about how they reported this "connection".

The researchers actually interviewed people about a variety of lifestyle behaviours. It is not clear why the press focussed on oral hygiene.

Most importantly, the researchers are not claiming that brushing teeth twice a day can prevent heart disease, or that not doing so can increase the risk.

The Telegraph's report was one of many which was misleading:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7771698/Brush-teeth-twice-a-day-to-prevent-heart-disease.html

Piracy and Theft - Is there a difference?

2009-11-22T07:15:00.000-08:00

It is often claimed that "piracy is theft". For example, it has been claimed that illegally downloading music is the moral equivalent of stealing a CD from a record shop?

The image above makes an important point. Theft, in law, is the taking away of another person's property with the intention of permanently depriving that person of possession. Music piracy apparently involves the duplication of property, not the removal of it.

However, it does need to be recognised that authors, musicians, movie companies, software companies, and so on, rely on royalties for their living. Surely widespread piracy involves the removal of those royalties.

It gets even more complicated though. Many people buy some music legally and illegally download other music. For many people, if illegal downloading were not available, they would simply have smaller music collections. It is not true to claim that every illegal download represents a loss to the copyright holder because people who illegally download music would not necessarily legally purchase it if illegal downloading were not available.

My conscience was not particularly troubled when I download music illegally that I have previously purchased legally on vinyl or cassette. Should I really be expected to pay the artist again simply for changing formats?

Does it matter if I illegally download a movie that has been shown on TV? I could legally watch it for free at a scheduled time and it is also legal to record it from the TV and skip past the adverts. If the movie is shown on the BBC, haven't I have already paid for my viewing by obtaining a TV licence?

On the other hand, some piracy clearly is damaging. In some countries, most computer software is pirated and even large business organisations rarely pay for their software licenses, causing a significant loss to the software producers. There are also some people who never pay for any of the music they listen to or for the movies they watch. This is unfair and it does represent a loss of income for those who hold the intellectual property.

"Piracy is theft" is probably too simplistuic a slogan but it is probably also too simplistuic to argue that piracy is mere duplication.

Opening up an Internet browser is like opening the door and going outside

2009-11-15T04:58:00.000-08:00

"Unsupervised surfing is like letting them roam the streets, says No 10 adviser"

Professor Tanya Byron, who is investigating the harmful effects of video games and websites, has used an analogy to warn parents of the potential dangers.

"A lot of parents don't realise that it's the same as opening the door and going out into the street, opening that [internet] browser."

In order for this analogy to work, I think we have to agree that the risks of using websites are similar in scale to the risks of children roaming the streets. She is effectively telling parents that it is irrational to allow children to surf the Internet when they don't allow them to roam the streets.

One important difference would be that there are several risks associated with allowing children to roam the streets that are not associated with surfing the Internet. Children can't, for example, get run over indoors.

Many people would be concerned with "stranger danger" i.e. the risk of children being abducted. We are told that predatory paedophiles operate on certain websites visited by children and then arrange to meet those children. However, in order to meet these paedophiles, the children would have to leave the home. So, it would seem that allowing children to "roam the streets" is a more dangerous activity, although it might become more dangerous if the children have previously surfed the Internet.

The Telegraph article is at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/digital-media/6554101/Internet-as-dangerous-as-letting-children-go-out-into-the-street-says-Prof-Tanya-Byron.html

Adolf Hitler was a German football coach, say one in 20 children

2009-11-06T13:31:00.000-08:00

I know that today's children know less about History than we would wish but I really think the claims of their ignorance in a survey in today's Daily Telegraph are going too far.

According to a charity called Erskine, which provides nursing and medical care for veterans, one in six children think Auschwitz was a theme park and one in 20 think the Holocaust was a celebration at the end of the war.

The article continues: "...one in 10 thought the SS stood for Enid Blyton's Secret Seven, and one in 12 believed the Blitz was a European clean-up operation following the Second World War."

2,000 children between the ages of 9 and 15 were surveyed.

As always, we should think about who has carried out the survey to suggest a motive for misrepresenting the true picture. Clearly this charity have a vested interest to exaggerate.

I think the problem probably lies in how the survey was conducted. My guess is that they used either multiple-choice or true/false questioning to elicit these responses.

The Telegraph article is at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/6507969/Adolf-Hitler-was-a-German-football-coach-say-one-in-20-children.html

Smacking children makes them less intelligent

2009-11-06T13:05:00.000-08:00

A researcher who has "spent 40 years studying the effects of corporal punishment" has concluded, according to the Daily Mail, that smacking children makes them less intelligent, and that the more children are smacked, the less intelligent they become.

The full Daily Mail article is here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1215985/Smacking-makes-child-intelligent.html

The argument seems to be as follows:

Smacked children are less intelligent than those who are not smacked.
The more often a child is smacked, the less intelligent s/he is likely to be.
Therefore smacking your child makes the child less intelligent.

On the other hand, this could simply be an example of correlation not proving causation. It may well be that children who are smacked tend to be less intelligent than those who are not smacked, but there are other ways in which this could be explained.

It is possible that parents who smack tend to be less intelligent than those who do not. If so, their children are likely to be less intelligent too, since intelligence is strongly hereditary.

A less kind explanation is that the children who get smacked could be the less intelligent children. Maybe they are getting smacked because they have done stupid things. Maybe there is a connection between low intelligence and bad behaviour.