Statistics are interesting. But the interpretation of statistics, much like the benchmark for beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
For example. did you know that nearly half of the population of the United States of America is below the average level of intelligence of that country?
I once cited that "amazing" statistic to a colleague who promptly blamed it on the administration and the decline of education over the last few years.
Politicians often use statistics to further their causes. But if one takes the time to carefully examine these "facts of certainty" one can often ascertain that there is much more doubt than there is proof in the pudding.
For example, if you heard that one-third of the citizens living in a country lived at or below the poverty level you might be dismayed. However, if the definition of "poverty level " was the highest average income of the bottom one third of the same citizens then there is no meaning that can be extracted from the fact of certainty.
Its simply saying the same thing two different ways.
If one chooses to use statistics as a means of persuasion, one should ensure that some meaning can be extrapolated from the presentation.
Otherwise it's just more white noise in the background.
Comments(30)