Public
- Public
- Network
- Groups
- Featured
- Popular
- People

In this response essay, I'll present the two main problems I see with the skeptics' approach, as exemplified in Odgers' review: 1. Odgers is wrong to say that I have no evidence of causation 2. Odgers' alternative explanation does not fit the available facts. Share 1) Odgers is wrong to say that I have no evidence of causation Odgers' central claim is that I have mistaken correlation for causation and that I have "no evidence" that social media is a cause, rather than a mere correlate, of the current epidemic of adolescent mental illness. Odgers says that I am just "making up stories by simply looking at trend lines."

Download link

In this response essay, I'll present the two main problems I see with the skeptics' approach, as exemplified in Odgers' review: 1. Odgers is wrong to say that I have no evidence of causation 2. Odgers' alternative explanation does not fit the available facts. Share 1) Odgers is wrong to say that I have no evidence of causation Odgers' central claim is that I have mistaken correlation for causation and that I have "no evidence" that social media is a cause, rather than a mere correlate, of the current epidemic of adolescent mental illness. Odgers says that I am just "making up stories by simply looking at trend lines."
https://mediacdn.aus.social/media_attachments/files/113/507/349/512/708/950/original/87ce929a16c4984f.jpeg

Notices where this attachment appears

Embed this notice
Just Another Amy (justanotheramy@aus.social)'s status on Tuesday, 19-Nov-2024 17:22:49 JST Just Another Amy
in reply to

@erici @camwilson
I guess we’ll see. But we know what lines pushed his buttons, don’t we?

In conversation about 6 months ago from gnusocial.jp permalink