The Black Hole......

How can anyone really know what's going on in someone else's head?

You can work out peoples biases quite easily, and from that work out how to move their position, or not, as the case may be.

My son worked on a learning system for a big pharma company using some stuff from IBM Watson a few years back that worked out participants learning biases (ie how they learnt new info) with just 20 or 30 questions, and then selected the right teaching package for the participant. Subsequent attainment tests showed a 15-20% improvement.
 
That is very evident Bonsai with the Brexit campaign; Cummings, Cambridge Analytica and other groups analysed the nature of the population's prejudices and propensities, and then constructed and directed selected 'button pushing' dogma to each.

Newspapers write and sell to the prejudices of a particular audience.
 
A few years ago I has some health issues, 5 different doctors gave me 5 different conflicting opinions. Each told me that if I didn't do what they said I would be in trouble in 5 years...
I remembered George Burns story about the advice from three of his doctors for him to stop smoking cigars. All of them were younger than him and already passed away at the time he told the story.
 
A few years ago I has some health issues, 5 different doctors gave me 5 different conflicting opinions. Each told me that if I didn't do what they said I would be in trouble in 5 years.

I've learned to ignore most experts, they don't know any better than the rest of us.

Mike

I'm terribly sorry that's the conclusion you came to.

I also have a hard time believing the story as stated: provided we're talking about board certified physicians and not a nebulous diagnosis (which is not to discount your health issue!), out of 5 you will get plenty of nuance and probably one with a very different opinion. I suppose it would be easy to not see that each has a different approach to the same fundamental problem and assume they're all saying something different.

Not that I'm trying to tease out your medical history at all, but the conclusion you've come to puts you into a much higher risk category of living with adverse, untreated health conditions with attendant consequences.

Edit to add--mods I do apologise if this crossed the line and won't be upset if it has to be pulled (and subsequent warnings etc). I mean it more from the real consequences of the erosion in trust of expertise.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately there are far more conditions that are very hard to diagnose, and are often not diagnosed or mis diagnosed, than the fortunately more common low hanging fruit of diagnosis.
It can very much depend on the experience, and biases of the doctor involved.
Harm, I think, has been done by TV dramas which show things far from the truth - same as with forensic crime scene stuff.
Medicine is a wonderful tool - but has a long way yet to go!
 
You can work out peoples biases quite easily, and from that work out how to move their position, or not, as the case may be.

My son worked on a learning system for a big pharma company using some stuff from IBM Watson a few years back that worked out participants learning biases (ie how they learnt new info) with just 20 or 30 questions, and then selected the right teaching package for the participant. Subsequent attainment tests showed a 15-20% improvement.
20, 30 cross-referenced? :scratch2: They call it Voight Kampff for short.

I wonder how low will it get in the end.
Experts don’t know anything. Science is trash

Many shakti stone promoters in disguise
Good thing we have measurements in audio reproduction world to separate chaff from wheat.