> all the exciting inferences you can make when you assume causation, I'm worried that the end result is a lot of bad science.
But this, is the definition of science: you make models on top of hypothesis that you assume, you see how existing data fits your model, and then you make falsifiable predictions based on your model.
Studying data without any (causal) model of what's happening is just collecting statistically significant trivia. It is research, for sure, but that's not enough to make it science. But hey, at least you published something.
But this, is the definition of science: you make models on top of hypothesis that you assume, you see how existing data fits your model, and then you make falsifiable predictions based on your model.
Studying data without any (causal) model of what's happening is just collecting statistically significant trivia. It is research, for sure, but that's not enough to make it science. But hey, at least you published something.