Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK

View:

 Message: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Topic: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Author: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] Font: Proportional Font

Options

Subject:

Correlation

From:

PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 17 Feb 2015 18:37:57 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

 text/plain (35 lines)
 ```Dear Chuck, It’s true that no one has said much about correlation. For me, the reason is that any one of dozens of processes suggest possibilities. Earlier, you mentioned correlation and causality: the reason I avoided talking about correlation is that there is generally no relation between correlation and causality. As with abduction and metaphor, correlation is valuable and suggestive in the logic of discovery, but there is much more require to establish causality. The famous example is the case of a rooster who crows every day at sunrise. This does not means that the rooster’s call forces the sun to rise. As best I know, every Nobel Laureate in physics holds a PhD. (I am not sure that every PhD is a physics degree — some may hold a PhD in mathematics.) There is 100% correlation between winning the Nobel Prize in physics and holding a PhD. There is an magnificently low correlation between earning a PhD and winning the Nobel Prize in physics. As with abduction, correlation points to interesting possibilities, but it does nothing to establish truth value, validity, or correct conclusions. Correlation is one of several dozens mechanisms that inspire creative and valuable ideas. Because we can build on these in many ways, there is more to be said than I felt I could manage in a short post. There are many books about correlation across many fields, but these tend to be technical and careful in delimiting the issues they address. There might be something in them, though, so Amazon is worth searching. The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy has a great deal on correlation tucked away with articles on other topics. But I felt that I couldn’t add much. The case of abduction is different. It is a definable process — and in a sense, one can address abduction in a more limited scope. I entered the conversation to make a collection of articles available and to offer a few apposite thoughts. Warm wishes, Ken Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier in Cooperation with Tongji University Press | Launching in 2015 Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia Chuck Burnette wrote: —snip— The only solid reference to correlation so far! (Except perhaps in Ken’s references) - Can you please provide the citation 2 you reference? —snip— — ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design ----------------------------------------------------------------- ```