Random intelligent discourse thread

[ThomSirveaux]

Rules:
- Civil discussion, only
- If things get too heated, change the topic

I'll start:

Postulate: Any metric used to quantify people as a data set is inherently biased and cannot be used to apply a broad definition of "normal" to the population it describes. Ergo, the statistical "normal" of a metric used to define people cannot be used to define a "societal normal."

 

[Blind Owl]

Rules:
- Civil discussion, only
- If things get too heated, change the topic

I'll start:

Postulate: Any metric used to quantify people as a data set is inherently biased and cannot be used to apply a broad definition of "normal" to the population it describes. Ergo, the statistical "normal" of a metric used to define people cannot be used to define a "societal normal."

Truth.
What is normal?
Or
There is no normal.

 

[EpilepticCricket]

Postulate: Any metric used to quantify people as a data set is inherently biased and cannot be used to apply a broad definition of "normal" to the population it describes. Ergo, the statistical "normal" of a metric used to define people cannot be used to define a "societal normal."

You're going to have to back that up with metrics that quantify people as a data set and show the bias and also prove its inherent nature.

Until, I'm going to have a beer and go shitpost on the internet somewhere. Maybe here! We'll see where the beer takes me.

 

[CrudeSasquatch]

I don't know what's happening.
I just wanted to post something so I could feel like i was part of the discourse!
100% of people polled have taken a poll!

 

[Grimbli]

I'm fairly certain we do not use the metric system in America, ergo any systems which quantify people into a metric is thereby invalid and must be converted to Imperial standard.