 |
 |
Ray Thomas suggested that: >professional statisticians have difficulty in distinguishing ends from >means. I see that some 'academic' statisticians may have difficulty with the idea that ends become the means by which other ends are then met. This is a fundamental aspect of 'problem solving' particularly in the industrial setting. >But there is no point in supporting the >science of statistics as a goal. Ninety nine percent of the worlds >population have no interest in advancing the science of statistics. They >are interested in results. Fine, but without the science of statistics results would be worse, right? I'm not interested in improving agriculture, just in eating, but without the science of agriculture I wouldn't have anything to eat. >The proposed revisions of the Charter present the advancement of the science >of statistic as an end. But the RSS cannot assume that what is good for >statisticians is good for society. The RSS is trying to go in two >directions. Seems to me that Ray is the one going in two directions here. Who said that the advancement of statistical science was meant for the benefit of statisticians? >The RSS competence in the area of statistics as facts about society has been >declining for many decades. So what? I'm interested in helping industry, using statistical tools and methods to do that, and it will help in that process if we, statisticians, show the rest of the World that we take ourselves, as professionals, as seriously as the other professions take themselves. Also it is expected that in a fairly short time, any EC capital project will have to be 'signed off' by a 'chartered' professional. I would prefer that when statistics is involved that a statistician does the signing off, hence one very good need for an accredited charter. >And it has to be said the RSS will have been a major actor in that failure. Describing the RSS as a 'major actor' in anything is absurd. The RSS is virtually powerless, even in it's own sphere of activity. It doesn't take a genius to see that. Getting a proper accredited charter is a start. Wouldn't you prefer a situation where a major decision, involving a big statistical input, taken by UK Govt. is only legal if the RSS have signed it off? Now that would make the RSS a 'major actor'. Like the BMA or the Law Society; or perhaps you don't think that you are up to that? Regards ****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] *******************************************************