METHODOLOGICAL PERSONALITIES: STES (Statistics) not STEM (Mathematics) (Science,

METHODOLOGICAL PERSONALITIES: STES (Statistics) not STEM (Mathematics)

(Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics vs Statistics)

Programmers, engineers, physicists, statisticians, economists. We specialize in instrumentation. ‘That which we cannot sense’. And I think for that reason we tend to apply constant discount to sense, perception and intuition. Our work corresponds to, and depends upon, and is tested by, reality.

Teachers, Professors, Mathematicians, Philosophers, Political Scientists, Sociologists, Psychologists, Biologists, physicians, and most scientists. Seem to incorporate idealism, utopianism, and a lot of other cognitive biases into their works.

We ‘practitioners’ are paid for our commercial applications, and must warrant, with our careers, our outputs.

While most others, are insulated from their errors and unaccountable for their statements, decisions and actions.

What I don’t understand is that physicists are in our camp, and doctors in the other camp. And therefore there is something to be learned from that observation.

I suspect that physics is the most advanced discipline, and its better at curing cognitive biases than any other discipline. In fact, we could argue that’s the purpose of physics.

Anyway. That we are, even very bright people, trapped in our methodological biases is endlessly fascinating.

I tend to like the ‘engineer’ spectrum. But we are constantly persecuted by the ‘talker’ community that is unaccountable for it’s actions and whose outputs are untestable.

A fact which I find an endlessly humorous attempt to maintain status in the face of overwhelming evidence that we’re actually leading intellectual progress. Not them.

Humans are fascinating creatures.