Information icon.svg Nominations and Campaigning for the 2022 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now closed.

The election booth is now open!

Talk:Survivorship bias

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon logic.svg

This Logic related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


"Comparing Shakespeare with more original works written later is a bad comparison."

Not sure what you meant by adding that, Proxima. I mean, I intended that section to criticize those same comparisons, for a different reason. Your comment, while quite true, doesn't seem relevant to the point of this page. Wehpudicabok [話] [変] [留] 08:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

It's relevant to the extent that Survivorship bias is only part of the reason why writers from the times of Shakespeare and Chaucer are considered more intelligent than modern people. Proxima Centauri (talk) 09:03, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone really believe such a thing? I don't think Shakespeare is a particularly good example anyway, as it simply isn't true to say that writings by his contemporaries "didn't survive into the modern era". There are plenty of other surviving examples of Elizabethan & Jacobean drama & poetry: many of them are pretty good & some are still performed; they're just not nearly as well known to the general public as Shakespeare's works. There are many reasons for that, some of which could be considered biases, but I don't think it's really survivorship bias as such. A better and more mission-related example might be the scriptures & gospels. €₳$£ΘĪÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 16:21, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not really knowledgeable in that area, but you're welcome to add it yourself. Wehpudicabok [話] [変] [留] 02:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)


I don't know if it's relevant, but I'd like to suggest a quote from Richard Lewontin.

Dialectical materialism is not, and never has been, a programmatic method for solving particular physical problems. Rather, a dialectical analysis provides an overview and a set of warning signs against particular forms of dogmatism and narrowness of thought. It tells us, "Remember that history may leave an important trace. Remember that being and becoming are dual aspects of nature. Remember that conditions change and that the conditions necessary to the initiation of some process may be destroyed by the process itself. Remember to pay attention to real objects in time and space and not lose them in utterly idealized abstractions. Remember that qualitative effects of context and interaction may be lost when phenomena are isolated". And above all else, "Remember that all the other caveats are only reminders and warning signs whose application to different circumstances of the real world is contingent."[1]

Thanks. -- (talk) 01:30, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

  1. Beatty, J. (2009). "Lewontin, Richard". In Michael Ruse & Joseph Travis. Evolution: The First Four Billion Years. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. p. 685. ISBN 978-0-674-03175-3.