Quote:
Originally Posted by Orruar
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
It's ok, I accept your apology.
What data should I be showing? The points I have made don't necessarily have data to show. Such as the fact that the soviets and chinese had/have strict gun laws. Should I come up with a bar graph that shows the number of gun laws in each case? The fact that you cannot fathom an argument based upon logic and reason is very telling. It's clear you bow down at the altar of muddled statistics. Statistics can ever only show correlation, which can help guide us in our search for truth, but cannot directly show us truth.
|
See, again you can't say anything without throwing in an insult.
A fact may include things outside of stats, such as gun laws in the soviet union. However, it is not logical to conclude that the soviets were against guns while allowing their own party members to have them. I have not read much about gun laws within the soviet union however. I have read Marx, and I do know he advocated violent revolution. Therefore, a communist along marxist lines would use violence and guns. I also made the point that neither Russia or China are actually communists, as is indicated by vast inequality and inconsistent policy relating to their political structuring and social statistics.
Yes, I remember you discussing correlation vs causation. However, most of the stats I was citing had more to do with constitution (not the document). Causal links are hard to verify, and can get caught up in chicken and egg problems such as retrocausality, but correlation while not definitive proof, is about as good as you're going to get when discussing social problems, because usually 1 factor does not cause 1 thing. That is why i focus on the constitution of a problem.