Editing Talk:1901: Logical

<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->
Potentially relevant: [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00224545.1954.9919125]
Potentially relevant: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdtwTeBPYQA]
Potentially relevant: [http://www.jstor.org/stable/1821269?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents]
[[User:Joshupetersen|Joshupetersen]] ([[User talk:Joshupetersen|talk]]) 16:00, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Added the title text to the explanation and transcript. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|'''JayRules''XKCD'''  ]]<sup>[[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|what's up?]]</sup> 16:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

For the record I believe the advantages of using statistics over intuition were thoroughly discussed in the Michael Lewis book [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball ''Moneyball''], also 538 has done studies comparing statistical approaches to election prediction to political punditry and finally the good old [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_Problem Monty Hall Problem].[[User:Sturmovik|Sturmovik]] ([[User talk:Sturmovik|talk]]) 16:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

"... inconclusive scientific evidence against White Hat's position"? Is "inconclusive" the best you can do? Or did you mean "''only'' inconclusive"? Randall is basically attempting to use an argument from silence against anyone asserting White Hat's basic position (for which there is some very good evidence). It's ironic that to argue against the position requires using the law of non-contradiction; hence is self refuting. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.52|198.41.238.52]] 22:41, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
: The joke isn't that rational decision-making is bad, it's that many of those who aggressively espouse the importance of rational decision-making and deride the influence of emotions are rarely as rational and logical in their decision-making as they like to think they are.

:If nothing else, a truly rational thinker would realize that for better or worse people ARE affected by emotional cues and that as such subtly insulting those you're speaking to is not a good way to influence opinions and change decisions.

:And a truly self-aware rational thinker would realize that the vehemence of his later complaints about how people are illogical and emotional might have less to do with the objective importance of rationality and more to do with his own feelings being hurt because his opinions were ignored or derided. 

:But surely that doesn't apply to anybody here and any sensation of defensiveness that might occur comes from a place of pure logic and reason, right?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.178.165|162.158.178.165]] 15:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

This comic is probably a response to the Nobel prize in economics awarded to Richard Thaler for finding ways to nudge people to decisions that the nudger believes to be more common sense.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.188|162.158.88.188]] 09:23, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

The problem with generalizations is that all of them are idiotic.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.151|162.158.111.151]] 12:14, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
: ... including the one you just used :-). -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:49, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
:: *Whoosh!*[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.172|141.101.98.172]] 11:55, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
::: *Whoosh!* [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.190|172.68.34.190]] 03:00, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
:::: f [[User:Nafedalbi|Nafedalbi]] ([[User talk:Nafedalbi|talk]]) 12:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)Nafedalbi