Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;EWC3, post: 4545125, member: 93416&quot;]A separate matter – but one I would like to address. Surely the only thing we are interested in is - what the story probably meant in the 1st century? So - in so far as matters of “significance” are not the same as probabilities – they are just of no interest to us?</p><p><br /></p><p>I spent a long time recently on a book on the history of coinage by the Nobel Laureate economist Sargent. It has a lot of tough (modelling) maths in it. Worse than that – he did not bother to define for readers what the terms in his equations actually meant!!! As if he was using the equations just to brow beat possible critics. And to a great extent it worked. I concluded his historical explanations were just not credible – but also that few spoke up in criticism – because he bullied people with tough maths.</p><p><br /></p><p>My position is close to Gorard’s – for a long time now he has argued that universities in general should probably stop teaching stats/tough maths to people in the humanities - that it is doing more harm than good.</p><p><br /></p><p>Rob T[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in