XML FeedsA Heretical Challenge to the Gospel According to Charts by John Myste
By JMyste on Jun 19, 2012 | In Policy | 4 feedbacks »
In response to: Burr Deming's
Heckle Obama, Rock with Romney, Michigan Lady Parts
John Myste may want to cover his eyes. Jerry actually uses graphs to visually display ... you know ... data points.
Yes, and The Heathen Republican was able to topple the "facts" to the ground without even working up a sweat.
I have a partial rebuttal to the Heathen Republican's brutal assault, but I really kind of let it go, because I have long wanted to see chartsists defend their positions honestly, which thus far rarely happens.
Generally, chartists do not defend their "facts," even when other chartists clearly have charts that refute them. They do not seek out the refutations (not the obviously flawed ones, but the ones of their peers), nor do they generally respond to them. Heathen made a very unusual exception in this case, and I applaud it. I really am clapping. You are probably a long way off, so you don’t hear it.
Now, Mr. Deming, if you actually believe in the validity of the "data points" provided by Mr. Critter, I challenge you to visit his site and answer The Heathen Republican's attack. You claim that skeptics ignore "the facts," "won't even consider them." You have a real opportunity to show that you are actually interested in the truth and if the charts are flawed, you wish to discover it, even if they are charts that support a liberal stance.
Since you consider the charts to be "data," "truth," "gospel," I suspect you will rush over their post haste and defend the truth.
See you there.
John Myste also writes for his own site, where chartists quoting Gospel are never safe from challenge.
Please visit John Myste Responds.
Trackback address for this post
Trackback URL (right click and copy shortcut/link location)
4 comments
Presentation, not real circumspect data, is exactly the main way charts persuade without "the truth" behind them. Therefore, the only rational challenge is the to the presentation (or more precisely, the methodology). Once way to “prove” something with a chart, is to structure your chart at a specific point in time that is most damning; another is to structure your chart with time increments that illustrate your point best; and a third way to is have your charts be variable to support your point as needed, which is what your charts did. A last way, of course, is to omit charts that seemed to back up the other side's points, which is what you, Burr, and Heathen do primarily.
Your charts, individually, are probably as good as Heathen's charts that he thinks proves something. He seemed unwilling to challenge them at an individual level, though, probably precisely for that reason. He has many choices to challenge. I would have thought he could have found one that he could tackle.
Anyway, your charts, taken in the context of others' charts, Burrs, Heathens' for example, do not prove your hypothesis, as they only addressed your side of the argument. That is not scientific. However, when taken all together, the three of you offer very strong evidence for my hypothesis, that charts do not seek truth, but seek to justify philosophical opinions.
Of course, those who are less prone to empirical data, will deny this, ignore it, and produce another chart.
Opinions, that's what this is all about!
I completely agree with you, Jerry.
I love the work you do and I admire the fact that you don't claim more than you offer.
Leave a comment
| « Senate Candidate: Stop Whining About Poor People | Fire Whistles and Facts » |
