Re: Mind's Eye Re: A Call To Democratic Arms?

He's also as stubborn as a mule Allan - makes him even better really.




Your pros and cons (plus margins) had me thinking rigs - I've been
asked for a book chapter on 'why economics isn't a science' and saw a
set of scales as I read your comments.  Coincidentally, Obama was
doing his inauguration speech on tv and I remembered you don't like
him - he changed to a lying toad in front of my eyes (literally in my
head - though I always know I'm seeing an illusion).  It was the
'bringing democracy to all nations of the world' bit.  Stuff lies to
us in science - mass is the classic - we treat it as creating
gravitational force (yet gravity is an illusion in general relativity)
and also treat it in terms of inertia - experimental results
coincidentally 'prove' both.  US (and all other) imperialism should
make a statement like Obama's impossible to perceive other than as a
lie (the historical evidence is that we have subverted democracy
almost everywhere).  I know from my own experience as an experimenter
that it is very difficult to set up measurement. Thinking of this
woolly mix I went to bed and dreamed of politicians as cheating
alchemists.  The dream turned sour at that point when I sensed I was
on to something.




I can see a machine able to flag up (say) US foreign policy effects as
politicians make their promises - clanking up pros and cons to make
lying in performance management more obvious.  Science is aware that
it still gets caught up in myths (like creation and big bang - can we
think without origin) but essentially works hard on making factual
databases 'anyone' can use in terms of knowing what and knowing how.
 The economic-political system generally prevents this altogether.
 Don't really know what I'm on about - but I'm not scared by the
machine possibilities and suspect somewhere in this I don;t believe we
are human yet - and might only become so with machine help.

Time to unleash the hound!
On Jan 23, 6:56 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> sounds like a great dog Neil
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:58 AM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maxwell is a stubby-legged Labrador and a bit of a wimp.  He's a
> > sweetie.
>
> > On Jan 22, 1:40 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> My last was a lab-shepherd with high energy till he grew old- age 13.
> >> Also had a Chesapeake Bay retriever- another large dog that loves
> >> water. I have a large backyard but he really needed a field- stream-
> >> woods,etc. This cold is hard on paws- some fit their dogs with
> >> sweaters and booties.//Yes- it does seem the Brits collapse in snow
> >> and unusual weather but it's a strange year- even Jerusalem could make
> >> snowmen this year. Anyway- happy travels today.
>
> >> On Jan 22, 12:56 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Max loves the snow - though we rarely drop much below freezing here
> >> > even with wind-chill.  I'm off into Manchester today, assuming out
> >> > trains run on a quarter of an inch of snow,
>
> >> > On Jan 22, 1:07 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > brrr.  We might be there overnight.  The deep freeze.  Wonderful
> >> > > world.  We move through it regardless.
>
> >> > > On Jan 21, 10:24 am, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > My earlier post has been diverted to outer space, it seems.
>
> >> > > > That loneliness may be a cover, you know.
>
> >> > > > Saul Bellow was a rascal.
>
> >> > > > The speed of information leads to surprise and a protean miss, often.
> >> > > > I look for patterns in history/culture and try to keep two columns-
> >> > > > pro and con with hope for the margins. The top tiers of government are
> >> > > > usually the culprits rather than their off-spring- and it's true of
> >> > > > tribes as well as complicated systems- the buck really does stop- even
> >> > > > in suitcases of cash and packets of Viagra.
>
> >> > > > My "dog" would need diapers- we're at -30 wind chill factor.
>
> >> > > > On Jan 21, 6:10 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > Of course, I don't expect anything tangled-up with government and
> >> > > > > academic bureaucracy to produce much practical.  The gist was once
> >> > > > > that we should aim for praxis, a form of rational action.  For some
> >> > > > > the guide was marxism, but most of us grew up with a form of Keynesian
> >> > > > > guide - the economics of full employment and FDR's never completed
> >> > > > > second Bill of Rights.  More recently we have reverted to the control
> >> > > > > fraud of banksters and neo-classical economics.  I was never much
> >> > > > > interested in the 'grand theory' - as a cop I was more interested in
> >> > > > > what people were hiding and lying about, as scientist the grand was
> >> > > > > excluded as rigorously as possible a the laboratory door and as a
> >> > > > > university teacher I was more interested in developing resourceful
> >> > > > > humans than daft, religious managerial theories.  As a kid, my elder
> >> > > > > brother and sister always claimed I changed the goalposts in argument
> >> > > > > and as I grew up I discovered this was what argument was generally
> >> > > > > about - the goalposts changing name to root metaphor and paradigm.
> >> > > > > Experts in argument are bought like lawyers and have about the same
> >> > > > > ethics.  When Socrates gestures at the Sophists claiming 'I know
> >> > > > > nothing, but even this is to know more than they' he is just being the
> >> > > > > smartest guy in the room.
> >> > > > > We say 'jaw-jaw' is better than 'war-war' - but there is no crucial
> >> > > > > experiment to decide in 'jaw-jaw'.  The problem with argument is that
> >> > > > > it needs arbitration if human beings are involved in it and the seeds
> >> > > > > of its own destruction are laid in most people having no training in
> >> > > > > how it is constructed.  If you get some training in this you can be
> >> > > > > bought like a lawyer as a mouthpiece.  Machine knowledge bases and
> >> > > > > reasoning capacity potentially offer a democratisation of argument
> >> > > > > expertise, manufacturing capability, medicine, finance and much more -
> >> > > > > evidence-based practice for all.  In practice, doing management
> >> > > > > information systems, one soon learns those currently in the know want
> >> > > > > to keep things that way.  I believe the professions are currently
> >> > > > > preventing this as surely as those smashing machines in the industrial
> >> > > > > revolution.  I believe this is the central issue of the moment - and
> >> > > > > my reasons concern the dream I have of the precipice of disgusting
> >> > > > > war,the dullness of politics, religion and literature.  Economic
> >> > > > > growth is nearly all uninteresting - FlopBook and so on - and rarely
> >> > > > > about the growth of capital I would value.  Would we could dream up
> >> > > > > something else - and why we cannot when 2% of labour can provide our
> >> > > > > food.  I miss any sense of collective dreaming and find only the
> >> > > > > loneliness more 'primitive' people I've met would comment on in the
> >> > > > > first blush of their experience amongst us.
>
> >> > > > > On Jan 21, 9:18 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > Those who have contributed to the thread have shown me there isn't
> >> > > > > > much general awareness of the 'technology'.  There are already
> >> > > > > > intelligent systems like Watson (IBM) doing a fair job on embodied
> >> > > > > > expert knowledge (medical in this case).  The general idea is in this
> >> > > > > > from New Scientist:
>
> >> > > > > > In your wildest dreams, could you imagine a government that builds its
> >> > > > > > policies on carefully gathered scientific evidence? One that publishes
> >> > > > > > the rationale behind its decisions, complete with data, analysis and
> >> > > > > > supporting arguments? Well, dream no longer: that's where the UK is
> >> > > > > > heading.
>
> >> > > > > > It has been a long time coming, according to Chris Wormald, permanent
> >> > > > > > secretary at the Department for Education. The civil service is not
> >> > > > > > short of clever people, he points out, and there is no lack of desire
> >> > > > > > to use evidence properly. More than 20 years as a serving politician
> >> > > > > > has convinced him that they are as keen as anyone to create effective
> >> > > > > > policies. "I've never met a minister who didn't want to know what
> >> > > > > > worked," he says. What has changed now is that informed policy-making
> >> > > > > > is at last becoming a practical possibility.
>
> >> > > > > > That is largely thanks to the abundance of accessible data and the
> >> > > > > > ease with which new, relevant data can be created. This has supported
> >> > > > > > a desire to move away from hunch-based politics.
>
> >> > > > > > Last week, for instance, Rebecca Endean, chief scientific advisor and
> >> > > > > > director of analytical services at the Ministry of Justice, announced
> >> > > > > > that the UK government is planning to open up its data for analysis by
> >> > > > > > academics, accelerating the potential for use in policy planning.
>
> >> > > > > > At the same meeting, hosted by innovation-promoting charity NESTA,
> >> > > > > > Wormald announced a plan to create teaching schools based on the model
> >> > > > > > of teaching hospitals. In education, he said, the biggest single
> >> > > > > > problem is a culture that often relies on anecdotal experience rather
> >> > > > > > than systematically reported data from practitioners, as happens in
> >> > > > > > medicine. "We want to move teacher training and research and practice
> >> > > > > > much more onto the health model," Wormald said.
>
> >> > > > > > Test, learn, adapt
>
> >> > > > > > In June last year the Cabinet Office published a paper called "Test,
> >> > > > > > Learn, Adapt: Developing public policy with randomised controlled
> >> > > > > > trials". One of its authors, the doctor and campaigning health
> >> > > > > > journalist Ben Goldacre, has also been working with the Department of
> >> > > > > > Education to compile a comparison of education and health research
> >> > > > > > practices, to be published in the BMJ.
>
> >> > > > > > In education, the evidence-based revolution has already begun. A
> >> > > > > > charity called the Education Endowment Foundation is spending £1.4
> >> > > > > > million on a randomised controlled trial of reading programmes in 50
> >> > > > > > British schools.
>
> >> > > > > > There are reservations though. The Ministry of Justice is more
> >> > > > > > circumspect about the role of such trials. Where it has carried out
> >> > > > > > randomised controlled trials, they often failed to change policy, or
> >> > > > > > even irked politicians with conclusions that were obvious. "It is not
> >> > > > > > a panacea," Endean says.
>
> >> > > > > > Power of prediction
>
> >> > > > > > The biggest need is perhaps foresight. Ministers often need instant
> >> > > > > > answers, and sometimes the data are simply not available. Bang goes
> >> > > > > > any hope of evidence-based policy.
>
> >> > > > > > "The timescales of policy-making and evidence-gathering don't match,"
> >> > > > > > says Paul Wiles, a criminologist at the University of Oxford and a
> >> > > > > > former chief scientific adviser to the Home Office. Wiles believes
> >> > > > > > that to get round this we need to predict the issues that the
> >> > > > > > government is likely to face over the next decade. "We can probably
> >> > > > > > come up with 90 per cent of them now," he says.
>
> >> > > > > > Crucial to the process will be convincing the public about the value
> >> > > > > > and use of data, so that everyone is on-board. This is not going to be
> >> > > > > > easy. When the government launched its Administrative Data Taskforce,
> >> > > > > > which set out to look at data in all departments and opening it up so
> >> > > > > > that it could be used for
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--