Correlation is not Causation

For hundreds and thousands of years, humans have utilized their observations of correlations to enhance their knowledge and understanding of Nature and science.

Suddenly, we have this famous Half Baked¬†assertion “Correlation is not Causation”!

This statement is technically FALSE. It should be rephrased into ” Correlation May Not imply Causation”.

The Truth is, an Observation of Correlation May or May not imply Causation while Causation will definitely imply Correlation. If there is no Correlations, the assertion of Causation will be false.

It means that while we may not jump into conclusion the hypothesis of causal links of cause and effect when a strong statistical correlation is observed, there will still be high possibility of causal relationship if we provide a reasonable theory or hypothesis and thus carry out further testing.

Theories can be proven dual ways. First set the theoretical hypothesis, then carry out a Double Blind Randomized Controlled Trials to eliminate other possible factors interfering in the result and see whether the hypothesis could be valid or not. However, even then, we always talk about statistical confidence levels and hardly in absolute terms.

This is because in real world, we have lots of factors affecting each other. To isolate factors into a Perfect environment for such study is actually very difficult. Thus, we must understand our imitations.

More often then not, scientific laws of nature were observed from imperfect real world situation. Just like law of gravity, relativity etc, are all observed empirically, not perfect under randomized controlled trials situation.

It is the wisdom of keen observers combined with theories put forward that gave us the vast knowledge of Nature. Of course, theories evolved and constantly challenged and rewritten throughout history. But the fundamental base is, we had and continue to depend on observation of correlations of empirical events to draw up the map of knowledge.

Thus, it is actually unscientific to outright deny causal relationship when there is a high correlationship as well as reasonable and plausible theoretical hypothesis put forward.

The correct scientific attitude is, hmm…we need to investigate further and deeper into such high level of correlations.

This is the way we approach data, statistics and empirical observations analysis scientifically. Why the exceptional for Vaccines?


Goh Meng Seng




2 Responses to “Correlation is not Causation”

  • xoxo:

    Play of words as usual.
    We conclude conning n cheating are correlated.
    Conning is deception.
    So too cheating.

    GD Star Rating
  • Harder Truths:

    GMS – you are not smart enough for this. Playing semantics is the refuge of the mediocre. Now you have become a philosopher who plgarises, and with no followers. Pathetic.

    GD Star Rating

Leave a Reply

 characters available

Scroll Down For More Interesting Stuff

Member Services
Self-SupportMembers LoginSelf-Support
Sponsored Advertisement
Search On TR Emeritus
Sponsored Advertisement
Visitors Statistic
Latest Statistic