
Ask HN: How do you avoid cherry-picking data? - cczizou
With all the data-powered hot takes on Covid, racism, police violence, government spending, etc., how does someone avoid cherry-picking data in order to support their own or their in-group’s bias?<p>Is this possible?
======
oldsklgdfth
1\. Read the sources outside of your view point.

2\. Play devil's advocate with the information you get.

Personally, i think it's important to remember that the world is very complex
and 2 views can be different and at the same time true.

Nickel and Dimed[0] is a book on low-wage jobs and how it is difficult to get
by without support from some kind of social program.

Scratch beginnings[1] is the story of a guy that tried to live in a shelter
and get by. In ten months he had moved into an apartment, bought a pickup
truck, and had saved around $5,300.

Both these stories are opposing, in the logical sense. But they also real.
Exploring different perspective helps dispel the notions that there is one
"truth".

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_and_Dimed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_and_Dimed)
[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scratch_Beginnings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scratch_Beginnings)

~~~
cczizou
This is useful. I tend to look for a universal rule I can abide by but reality
requires alternative solutions. My hope is to find solutions that benefit
collective society while not creating new inequities in the process. I believe
conflicting realities need to be held in tension rather than allowing them to
cancel each other out.

~~~
oldsklgdfth
> I tend to look for a universal rule I can abide by but reality requires
> alternative solutions.

I do the same. For me it's result of applying "scientific thinking" to
everything, and searching a "grand unifying theory".

I agree that conflicting realities should be displayed, as long at there is no
effort to try any reconcile them and force some homogeneity.

------
drunkpotato
I think the real answers are unsatisfying but unfortunately true:

1\. Time. In the moment it's very hard to understand what's going on. Time
gives perspective. The down-side to this is that raw data sometimes gets lost
with time, and then the fights begin about how to interpret what data there
are.

2\. Judgment. In the moment, you have to use a combination of historical track
record of the data source and your own judgment. New York Governor Cuomo did a
good job of explaining the subtleties of this at his daily briefing yesterday
(Saturday), which I recommend watching. In summary, there are certain things
doctors and the WHO thought were true and recommended several months ago that
turned out not to be true, and new information and policy recommendations get
disseminated as we learn more.

~~~
cczizou
These are very true and so difficult to adhere to when I’m emotionally
connected to an issue. Thank you!

------
verganileonardo
Follow the scientific hypothesis-driven approach.

You try to prove that your hypothesis is wrong. If you can't find evidence
that your hypothesis is wrong, you can "accept" that your hypothesis is right.

This forces you to try to find holes in your logic. If you can't find any,
probably it is solid.

~~~
cczizou
Thanks! This is so easily forgotten.

