Correlation(ism)

by CarlD

Is this helpful?

Advertisements

12 Comments to “Correlation(ism)”

  1. Amazingly precise. From the molecular to the molar, it seems.

  2. Quite so. Something to chew on…

    Btw, the cartoon is from xkcd; thanks to drek at scatterplot for the referral. The scrollover alt text is “Correlation doesn’t imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing ‘look over there’.” Is this ‘allure’?

  3. Carl: ““Correlation doesn’t imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing ‘look over there’.” Is this ‘allure’?”

    Kvond: I think that there is something to this, and why Graham is so enamored with the causative powers of metaphorical allure. The similiarities of metaphorical comparison are powerful centers of attraction which bring out mind and body to focus on a possible nexus, something to be investigated. But I think Graham has it backwards in his attempt to make every dustball and Galaxy a poetizer, moment by moment. It is not that causation is to be reduced to allurement and metaphorical displacement so much as as language users, the statement X is a Y, when patently untrue, gives rise to the noticing of new connections, new causations, soon to be discovered. Causation is not reducible to allure, but rather allure can direct us to new aspects of causation; or it can simply lead alternatively into dead-end deposits of jouissance coagulation, and affective sacrificial dumping grounds; perhaps ultimately to a combination of the both.

  4. Oh boy, good one, cheered me up…

  5. I live to serve.

    Glad to see you’re still out and about. What are you up to?

  6. Sorry about the comment mess, here’s my comment – I can’t even get lucky with computers:

    It’s been a rough week, mostly job related, dealing with all sorts of asshole and the health issues sort of snuck up on me as well – but i’m optimistic, you know? i had a good run anyway…

  7. Hang in there. You just have to show those computers who’s boss.

  8. This comment is true on some many levels, I missed the point in my life when they started hiring computers for administrative jobs, you know? The future is here, I suppose.

  9. Strength to Mikhail.

  10. Yes, although I have no idea what’s going on I am speculatively and affirmatively certain that it will all turn out well in the end, with only minor alterations (cause unknown) of non-essential qualities or notes in the ethereal interstitial plasma of exciting new objects aborning, and your withdrawn objectivity intact. In short, none of this, whatever it is, will ultimately touch ‘you’, whatever that is, plus all sorts of other good things too. How awesome is that?

  11. Carl, that is nearly Pauline.

    In fact it made me realize how Pauline Graham’a Object Oriented Philia really is. Perhaps that is it. Badiouites and Harmanites arguing over the proper patrimony of St. Paul, with Badiouites tugging at the necessary Set/sub-set universalisms of ruptures to Truth, and the Harmanites (I only know of one, but still) trying to rescue the “dark-mirror” soul states of the choosen pagans in all their worldly sensuality, putting on the garment of Christ.

Leave a Reply!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: