gplaya123
Thanks Received: 15
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 90
Joined: September 04th, 2012
 
 
 

Correlation vs causation

by gplaya123 Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:07 am

Could someone differentiate between the following two questions,
one from prep 19 LR 2 #4
and
one from prep 48 LR 4 #9?

I feel like they are the same things!
But former has no correlation whereas the latter does, which means that the alternative factor does not weaken the first one but second one...

Thanks!
User avatar
 
ohthatpatrick
Thanks Received: 3808
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 4661
Joined: April 01st, 2011
 
 
 

Re: Correlation vs causation

by ohthatpatrick Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:00 pm

Let me preempt my response by saying that when you dive into the world of Causality/Explanations, you're going to see tons of similarity and tons of variety. The similarity comes from the fact pattern of the arguments themselves:

1. correlation between X and Y --> X causes Y
or
2. X happened --> Y is the explanation
(note: no correlation in the Explanation fact pattern)

I didn't fully understand your question because you said you feel like these are the same question but then you mentioned the differences. How are they the same?

I wouldn't call these two questions the same, except for the fact that they're both in the world of Causality/Explanations.

In the world of
correlation between X and Y --> X causes Y
====
Correct answers either
1. deal with reverse causality
2. deal with an alternate cause
3. deal with adding more evidence/counterevidence that X and Y go hand-in-hand

In the world of
X happened --> Y is the explanation
===
Correct answers either
1. deal with an alternate explanation
2. attack/bolster the credibility of the provided explanation

So Test 48 Q9 is from the correlation --> causality world and the correct answer (A) is doing #2, providing an alternate cause (Oh, it's not the VITAMINS that are helping, it's the other ingredients in foods that contain these vitamins)

Test 19 Q4 is from the Explanation world and the correct answer (D) is doing #2, attacking the credibility of the provided explanation (if ferrous material promoted a great increase in diatoms, then how come we don't see more diatom shells during that period?)

Let me know if this clears things up or if you have follow-ups.
 
gplaya123
Thanks Received: 15
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 90
Joined: September 04th, 2012
 
 
 

Re: Correlation vs causation

by gplaya123 Tue Sep 10, 2013 11:57 pm

Thanks for prompt reply.
I still have a lingering question.
I cant understand why Test 19 Q4 isn't "cause/correlation" question despite the fact that the conclusion has the word "promote" in it.

Thus I thought C could be the answer too, by providing alternative causes. Thoughts?