Causality diagram

Causality can be deterministic or probabilistic.

Probabilistic causality can be normothetic or idiographic.

(That's the diagram part)

So my interpretation of what that means is this (correct me if I'm wrong, please!):

Normothetic causality is one or two major contributors causing an effect. Idographic causality is a long list of every factor affecting a given situation. Nigem used the Crime example in class. Both are probalistic.

Deterministic Causality is the harder one to me. It's X determines Y and it's NOT probable, it's concrete. If X, then Y (so it's sufficient causality)?

Maybe an alternate question: What is Deterministic Causality?

Ethical Principals

What is Researcher ID (just that the researcher must identify self to subject?) Dosn't that fall under Concealing and Deception?

Example of sufficient causality?

Def: If X, then Y. Y can occur seperatly. Sufficient is not necissary condition. So if X happens, Y is a cascade effect of X and will ALWAYS happen if X happens.

What's an example?

What's a probabilistic relationship?

What's a probabilistic relationship?

Mindy's post

Mindy, reply here (you don't have to have an account, just reply anonomyously) with your questions that you want other people to answer. If you have answers to other people's questions, click reply under that posting and tell em what the answer is. --Crystal

Meet Niko (just something to lighten the mood)

I clicked on the Next Blog link at the top right of the page (thinking it was like a next message thing) and I found myself in Niko's land. According to Niko: "Hey I'm Niko and I'm 14 years old. I love games and movies. I also love music I'm also a Christian. "Apparently he is also into PS2 games since that's what his blog is about. Anyways, it was an unexpeted event that made me giggle. Thought I would pass it on.

FYI... Possible Question Topic

I have here marked in my notes that Nigem specifically made mention that the topic of Theoretical Statements would be a subject for an essay question. Personally, at this point I don't care because I have major information overload going on. But just in case this comes up, you might want to review the progression from bullshit to Theoretic Invariance, the two types of propositions and the two types of relational statements within that. Maybe even know the criteria for establishing a relationship and the basics about causality.

Assumptions of Science and so on...

I took the following from your Essay Questions Draft, Crystal. Here is my imput...

Discuss assumptions of science and principals of scientific community and factors affecting objectivity.

Assumptions of Science:
(have you seen that so very stupid Capital One commercial with David Spade and his book of like 1001 ways to say "no"? At the end of the commercial when the caller says they are going to call Capital One he yells out "Nanka!" or whatever he says. Well, that commercial finally has a point - and that point is to make it easier for us to remember the Assumptions of Science. I remember that this acronym is for this topic because David Spade has become an ASSumptions of Science. Now, he yells out "Nanka" or whatever, but if you put a little spin on it you might think of it as NANKKW with the W being pronounced like "wha". So here we go:

1. Nature is orderly and regular
2. All natural phenomena have natural causes
3. Nothing is self evident
4. Knowledge is derived from the acquisition of experience
5. Knowledge is superior to ignorance
6. We can know nature

See? NANKKW!


3. Principals of Sci Comm:
Okay, go with me here for a moment. Essentially the Principles of the Scientific Community are things that they look for and "just gotta' have." Kind of like shopping for that perfect outfit. Only in this case we are not shopping, we are not the shopper, we are the SHOPER (I guess we had to "pee" at some point)...

1. Skepticism (for the sake of duplication of results)
2. Humility (scientists are not god and they better damn well know that)
3. Objectivity (intersubjectivity)
4. Parsimony (keep it simple stupid)
5. Ethical Neutrality
6. Relativism

(Now, you had transparency, but I didn't have anything about that. Is it another word for one of those things listed or did I doze off and miss something somewhere?)


Factors affecting Objectivity:
1. Idols of the Tribe
2. Idols of the Cave
3. Idols of the Theater
4. Idols of the Marketplace

(Just remember how Billy Idol put it... "We are only human (Tribe - as humans we want to feel gooooooood) with two eyes (Cave - our view of the world is through the mouth of the cave which is constructed by family socialization - do you need to remember the whole "family socialization thing"? Just think of the first thing you saw with your eyes... mama) and two ears (Theater -
everybody says so, therefore it must be true) and one mouth from which to speak (Marketplace - words, terminology, concepts and their uses) or sing really rockin' songs like "White Wedding") And that's a FACT you cannot OBJECT to my friend!

5 Essay Qs

Discuss assumptions of science and principals of scientific community and factors affecting objectivity.

Assumptions of science:
1. Nature is orderly
2. Natural laws are discoverable
3. Events have natural causes
4. Nothing is self-evident 5. Knowledge is derived from experience 6. Knowledge is superior to ignorance

Principals of Sci Comm:
1. Humility
2. Parsimony
3. Objectivity (intersubjectivity)
5. Skepticism (for the sake of duplication of results)
6. Ethical Neutrality

Factors affecting Objectivity:
1. Tribe (species or cultural-specificity like desire to be happy)
2. Cave (social constructions like family)
3. Theatre (factors based on received opinion like sources of authority)
4. Marketplace (use of terminology like woman)


Discuss meaning of relationships

1. Recripricol. (Investments and profits, difficult to establish direction of causation)
2. Symmetrical. (No influence between variables, ice cream and rape)
Includes 5 Types:
1. Alternative indicator of same concept
2. Common Cause
3. Functional interdependence (part of same system, heart and lung)
4. Common Complex (2 parts of same phenomenon, opera and Audi)
5. Accidental
3. Asymmetrical (direction of causality can be established)
Includes 6 types:
1. Stimulus Response (experiment)
2. Disposition Response (influence)
3. Property Disposition (age affect conservatism)
4. Necessary Precondition (atomic bomb and tech)
5. Eminent Relationship (effect is intrinsic to def of concept; red tape and bureaucracy)
6. Ends and Means (answer is in mind of subject; sex and STDs, which came first depends on goal of subject).


Discuss level of theorizing. (Type, fx, level of propositions)

Construction:
1. Scope. Macro or micro.
2. Function. Structure, Process, or dynamics (Is this a theory that describes the process by something occurs or that describes the structure of something or does it describe how something happened?)
3. Structure. Logical (A because B, therefore C, constructed deductively) or Loose (set of probabilities, constructed inductively)
4. Level (of analysis). Individual, group, large group, institution.

What is the word, something besides Loose? What do you have for #2 in your notes, I can't seem to nail down what the hell function is?!!

Explanatory Types
1. Ad-hoc. Simple, limited.
2. Taxonomies. Typologies, exhaustive categorizing.
3. Conceptual Framework. Additionally, linkage between categories. Able to form propositions from em.
4. Theory. Logical system of Propositions from 2 and 3. All concepts and relationships are defined.

Levels of Propositions:
1. Existence statements (conditions under which event will occur)
2. Relational statements (Associational (A related to B) and determinable(A cause B))

Discuss methods of settling doubt.

1. Tenacity. Believe it cause you always believed it, and because changing that belief would make you unhappy.

2. Intuition. 'Everybody says' and 'it makes sense'. The earth is flat. Subject to early learning and fashionable ideas. Fallible.

3. Authority. 2 Types: Reasonable (gonna believe someone else because I don't have the time to do my own research, but if I ever do, then going to change mind). Irrefutable (church, societal norms, what to wear to a funeral. Can't argue with this source of authority). No argument settled by authority will ever be unquestioned as there are too many sources of authority.

4. Scientific Method. Self-critical, admits that it can lead you into doubt, and provides error-correcting. Open, mutable framework for discovery.

Bloody Relationships...

Since I haven't figured out how to quote yet either, I figured a little copy/paste action would work for now.

Crystal wrote:

Bloody relationships: What the hell is the Asymetrical Ends and Means, and what is the Property Dispositoin, and what is Emenint Relationship (how are those different from others that were listed). I'm gonna make this a seperate post because I think I need to go through and contrast them.

You wanna' talk relationships? You came to the right place!

Asymmetrical Ends and Means is like this:

(Now this is a bit confusing because there are two points of view or perspectives involved in this one - but once you understand that.... you've got it)

The question about the relationship between the two lies in the question of "why".

Why do we use the means that we do?
Why do we reach the ends that we do?

If we begin with a goal in mind, say for instance (and I am being outrageous and creative here so this sticks in your brain - that's just the way I study so don't shun me forever because you think I'm weird after this)

If, for instance, I start with the goal (my ENDS) being that I wish to get an STD, say ghonnereah. With my ENDS in mind first, I determine that the MEANS (or "what I need to do") to reach these ends is to whore around with as many people as I can in order to reach my ENDS and get ghonnereah. This is a situation where the ENDS determine the MEANS.

However, let's say I'm just a slut and I like whoring around with as many people as I can (this behavior is my MEANS or "what I do".) Because I do this, or employ these MEANS, I get ghonnereah. The ghonnereah is still my ENDS, but I wasn't planning getting it. Therefore in this case, my MEANS determined my ENDS.

Both situations are possible and in this case it is easy to determine which lead to the other. But that's only because I can tell you. The bird building the nest in turn preserving the survival of the species that Nigem used in class - that's harder because the bird can't tell us if she's building the nest because she wants to protect her young and help ensure the survival of her species (which would be ENDS leading to MEANS) or if she builds the nest from instinct and it just ends up being something that helps to preserve the species (MEANS leading to ENDS).

Now, I'm going to get a shot of pennicillin for my ghonerreah and move on to Property Disposition.

Did you understand the Disposition Response Relationship? I'm guessing you did since it was not on your list.

Therefore you already understand what a disposition is (what something can be and is a pretty stable thing like a liberal or a conservative, being able to play an instrument, having an extremely high sex drive - just think of the disposition as sexual positions and you won't forget that Dispositions, while they are traits, are not fixed and are able to be altered, just as sexual positions can be, like a top can sometimes become a bottom (not often but it can happen).

Now, properties on the other hand, CANNOT be changed. Whether you are a top or a bottom doesn't matter if you bring the wrong equipment to the game being held under the sheets. So things like sex (and age, race, eye color, - basically things that just "are") are properties.

Now this is where it gets interesting. When we look at the Property Disposition Relationship we know that the PROPERTY is ALWAYS the INDEPENDENT variable because you just can't change it no matter how hard you try. So, to follow our example we will use SEX (our PROPERTY) as our Indpependent variable. Inquiring minds want to know how sex affects sexual behavior. Get it? Property Disposition Relationship.

(Yes, I use sex in alot of my examples, but I figure "Hey, if it can sell beer why can't it sell sociology?")

Immanent Relationships are actually quite simple. It's like where there's smoke there's fire. Meaning, if you build a fire you're going to get smoke - it's just a matter of time (hence the fact that it is immanent). We discussed in class how red tape arises out of beaurocracy and how oligarchy arises out of democratic organization. As in the fire example, smoke aRISES from fire. It's kind of (by a stretch of imagination) in there already, and just waiting for the right moment to JUMP OUT AND GET YOU! One does not necessarily cause the other, it's more like spawning. Red tape is the devil child of beaurocracy and oligargy is democracy's Rosemary's Baby.


Did any of this help or did I make things worse. It makes sense in my head, but then again, I've been know to create what my friends call "Hope Logic" that makes sense to me easily, but takes an awful lot of explaining to get anyone else to make sense of it at all.

List of questions so far (Edits in red)

What is empiricism?

What is grounded theory? (Just a theory developed from observations and research or does it have addl meaning?) Theory backed by empirical observations.

Professor Pellson, As students in front row. "Students who sit in front row are good students" Example of inductive or deductive reasoning? (Q5 from ch2 review) Since it's from observation to theory, I'm gonna say it's Induction. Correct?

What the hell does this mean? (From Assumptions of Science handout)
"Finally, methodology requires intersubjectivity, meaning that knowledge in general and the scientific methodology in particular have to be transmissible." ???
I've got the intersubjectivity but what's transmissible?

What do we need to know about Basic and Applied research? (The handout comparing them...?) Basic research is research for research's sake (and dosn't get funded very often!). Applied research has a goal, either as fodder for promotion of a product by a manufacturer or social change.

How about that diagram that Nigem likes to draw so much? Do we need to be able to reproduce it? (It seems like a good idea but I suck at memorizing diagrams). Understand it and be able to reproduce it -- it's Wallace.

How about social theory and ideology? I don't remember anything about that on the test... does anytone else? I also don't have any notes about that it woudl be an essay q...? I have ideology = church on the next page of my notes.

Under the 4 parts of theories notes:
What are function and structure? Help! Still stuck on this one.

I'd just like to swear a lot on the topic of memorizing that stupid list of paradigms.

Anything you think we need to know in particular from that handout on the list of differences among the 3 approaches to research. I'm fuzzy on the middle one but the other 2 are pretty solid.

Bloody relationships:
What the hell is the Asymetrical Ends and Means, and what is the Property Dispositoin, and what is Emenint Relationship (how are those different from others that were listed). I'm gonna make this a seperate post because I think I need to go through and contrast them.

That's so far.... :-(