Recognizing a key distinction between mathematics and statistics is helpful in understanding how we know if a statement is true. 
Posting about deductive and inductive reasoning­­­­­­­­ from In All Things - an online hub committed to the claim that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ has implications for the entire world.
http://inallthings.org/lies-statistics-mathematics-and-the-truth

Tintle, Nathan L.

English

Dordt College

Digital Collections @ Dordt Faculty Work Comprehensive List 3-22-2017 Lies, Statistics, Mathematics and the Truth Nathan L. Tintle Dordt College, nathan.tintle@dordt.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/faculty_work  Part of the Christianity Commons, Mathematics Commons, and the Statistics and Probability Commons Recommended Citation Tintle, N. L. (2017). Lies, Statistics, Mathematics and the Truth. Retrieved from https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/faculty_work/683 This Blog Post is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Collections @ Dordt. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Work Comprehensive List by an authorized administrator of Digital Collections @ Dordt. For more information, please contact ingrid.mulder@dordt.edu. Lies, Statistics, Mathematics and the Truth Abstract "Recognizing a key distinction between mathematics and statistics is helpful in understanding how we know if a statement is true." Posting about deductive and inductive reasoning from In All Things - an online hub committed to the claim that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ has implications for the entire world. http://inallthings.org/lies-statistics-mathematics-and-the-truth/ Keywords In All Things, truthfulness and falsehood, conclusions, science Disciplines Christianity | Mathematics | Statistics and Probability Comments In All Things is a publication of the Andreas Center for Reformed Scholarship and Service at Dordt College. This blog post is available at Digital Collections @ Dordt: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/faculty_work/683 Lies, Statistics, Mathematics and the Truth inallthings.org /lies-statistics-mathematics-and-the-truth/Nathan TintleAt the root of much of the ongoing “science vs. faith” debate is a fundamental question that has plagued humankindfor millennia– how do we know whether something is true? As Christians, recognizing Scripture as God-breathed isa good place to start. Quickly, however, we get into questions that Scripture does not address explicitly – “Is it truethat there are black holes in distant galaxies?” “Is it true that DNA is the building block of all life?” “Is it true thatsmoking causes lung cancer?”Science often relies on logical, mathematical, and/or statistical arguments to help make claims about what it believesto be true. Yet, recognizing a key distinction between mathematics and statistics is helpful in understanding how weknow if a statement is true.For example, mathematics is primarily focused on deductive reasoning. This is the kind of reasoning or logic thatsays, “If A is true, then B must be true.” These are the kind of truths that God has woven into the tapestry of theuniverse. Truths like “if I want to get from my house to yours, then the shortest distance is a straight line” or “if I dropa ball from my hand, then gravity will pull it towards the ground.”In contrast, statistics is primarily focused on inductive reasoning. This is the kind of reasoning that says, “If I observeA, then B is likely true.” Just like science, in our day-to-day life we use inductive reasoning all the time. God providedus five senses to observe the world around us and draw conclusions about it. Without inductive reasoning, evenwith incomplete observations and uncertain conclusions, we are paralyzed to action. If I observe that it’s sunnyoutside, but I know that it’s winter and I see snow on the ground, I will likely conclude that it’s cold out and put on mycoat before I walk out the door. If I see my son with chocolate on his lips and cookie crumbs on the counter, I mightconclude that he probably snuck a cookie from the cookie jar.Things that may impact our inductively reasoned conclusions include the potential consequences of a wrongconclusion and our prior belief about how likely B would have been before I observed A. The consequences ofputting my coat on when it’s actually warm outside aren’t so big. On the other hand, giving a punishment to a childbased on uncertain information – if you are wrong – could be a bigger problem. How likely I think it is to be warm inwinter or how often my child takes cookies from the cookie jar without asking are key things that might also impacthow quickly I “jump to conclusions”.So, where can mathematical and statistical reasoning get into trouble in their quest for truth? For mathematics anddeductive reasoning, the problems lie more with the premises: that is, what you assume to be true first (“If A…”).Whether or not you assume God exists can lead to fundamentally different conclusions about how a person choosesto live their life. Thus, as in mathematics, we see that people will generally agree on conclusions if they agree onpremises.For statistics and inductive reasoning, the trouble is typically less about what we’ve observed. The issue is moreabout how different people can look at the same observations (data) and conclude different things. Statisticsattempts to lay out accepted rules for how to systematically evaluate observed evidence and draw conclusions thatquantify uncertainty (for example, “I see strong evidence for this” instead of “This is 100% true”).When we see apparent contrasts between the truth we believe and what science claims to be true, it can be helpfulto think about where the conflict lies. Is the conflict due to differences in the premises? For instance, is sciencemaking a claim which, even if logical, starts with an assumption that there is no God? Or, is science making astatement based on observations with which we can agree, but conclusions that we might not?1/2How then should we vet the claims of science when they challenge our own beliefs as Christians? I would argue thatit is healthy to ask a few simple questions when confronted with these challenging situations: (1) Deductivequestions: What premises is this claim based on? How do these premises align or not with my own beliefs? (2)Inductive questions: What observations have been made? Do I agree that these observations are true? What levelof uncertainty has science placed on their conclusions based on those observations? (3) Overarching questions: Isit possible that my view of God is too “small” if I can’t believe that my initial position is wrong after being presentedwith new information/data/conclusions? Can I carefully articulate whether my differing conclusions are due todifferent premises or different interpretations of observation?For example, in the climate change debate, we might ask questions like: (a) How likely is it that we would seerecent changes in global average temperatures if climate change is being impacted by human activity? is not beingimpacted by human activity? (b) What are areas of general agreement and disagreement about observations ofglobal temperature changes? its root cause(s)? (c) What assumptions are made about current human activities overthe next decades when projections are made regarding our world’s ecology in 50 or 100 years? (d) How does mybelief in a sovereign God who ascribed the cultural mandate (Genesis 1:28) to all of humankind impact my personalactions and activities regardless of the causes of climate change? How might this be different for a non-Christian?Recognizing that God has given all humans the ability to draw both deductive (mathematical) and inductive(statistical) conclusions is one way that we all participate daily in the continued unfolding of God’s creation. Humblyapproaching perceived inconsistencies with confidence in a sovereign God, and with humility about the sinful lenseswith which we view the world, may help us continue to be salt and light in a world that often pits science against faithand tries to force us to “take sides” in a hostile and combative war of words.2/2

Lies, Statistics, Mathematics and the Truth

https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1685&context=faculty_work

Lies, Statistics, Mathematics and the Truth

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Dordt College