What, Why & How do we Know ?
I remember Julie when she started at the NME – alongside Tony Parsons and Charles Shaar-Murray I seem to recall. You can’t help but notice she’s continued to be a contrarian in her life since, but this Desert Island Discs session is one for the scrapbook. You have to suspend disbelief, and Kirsty does a great job doing that.
Guess I need to check a few facts – became a Christian and is now ex-Christian and studying Judaism …. ? Spike interview from 2005.
My view: He’s no doubt stepping down due to frailty of age. They already have to wheel him about. In days when authority counted for something, the office of Pope could afford to continue until the demise of incumbent body. Pretty sure the Rap Singer sees that his church needs a person of some strength in leadership – in these days where the church needs to respond to anti-authoritarian attacks, and worse.
“this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only with words and deeds, but no less with prayer and suffering. However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the bark of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary”
Big data (*) – power of correlation of patterns without necessary causation, understanding or explanation – makes sense when the data largely reflects human psychology and behaviour. Because the human explanations would involve rationalisations and game-theoretic responses, not objective scientific causation. The what may be useful even before the why is considered. The what may provide pragmatic value, even near-real-time usefulness, whereas the why may ultimately provide new “knowledge”. These are not mutually exclusive.
The word model is overloaded here – all models are wrong, but some are more useful – but “useful for what?” matters. Important to recognise the different kinds of “model” here and how they’re used – statistical patterns and correlations of what happens, to assign odds to predictions (to markets, say) as distinct from models of mechanisms and processes, that represent how the world works (the economy, say) – especially in the latter case where we are trying to decide inputs, apply agency, to achieve valued outcomes.
Newton:
“I can model the stars in the cosmos,
but not the madness of men.”
Humans will respond to the outcomes of such models – it’s a never ending arms-race – where values are at stake. The usual adage about management by measurement distorting the human process.What can be measured crowds-out other values that matter more to humanity.
The sceptics here are Tiffany and Lisa (and me). Lisa even makes the slip of referring to the geeks in maths and economics as “men”. Many a true word.
(Fair bit of discussion about brains, minds and consciousness too … even shared consciousness beyond any given brain … a longer story.)
[(*) And when I use “big-data” here, I’m simply implying a sample size so huge, that it is likely to be statistically significant for any pattern discovered within it, as opposed to a sample gathered with any particular investigation in mind. Like “cloud” it’s rapidly becoming just the latest jargon for the web of information on the internet of technology.]
Science has made philosophy redundant – ho hum. Seen Wolpert talk on this before.
Need to view, digest and respond later.
Interesting watching the management manoeuvres at Reading FC since Brian became manager and Anton became owner, whilst Sir John and Nicky continue as chair and director. Definite signs of teamwork, compared to the usual knee-jerk headless-chickens at most clubs. Last mentioned here the equally encouraging signs of man-management, but many references to the “quality” of football decisions not to mention management gurus and motivation throughout this blog.
Sure enough, Times journalist Roger Alton, here writing in the Spectator, being impressed when meeting Brian. A cut above the rest.
Far more interesting [than talking with Steven Gerrard (*)] was the opportunity to chew the fat, or at least the sushi and avocado, with the admirable Brian McDermott, manager of beleaguered — or resurgent, depending where you’re standing — Reading FC. McDermott is a Heston Blumenthal lookalike with the easy manner of the bloke you like to meet down the pub. But what he’s achieved along the M4 is remarkable, and not just because he must have quadrupled his Russian owner’s £30-odd million investment. He is a real self-improver and a brilliant man manager. The books he reads are management books, not football ones, and that’s the ethos he’s brought into Reading.
That’s why he doesn’t seem intimidated by the challenge of surviving in the top flight even though the odds — and the wage bills, a fraction of most Premier League clubs’ — are so stacked against him. There is a culture there of hard work and improvement, so that he can be satisfied with his work even if it doesn’t keep his team up. When we spoke Reading had just beaten Newcastle away after being 1-0 down at half time. So no wonder when you ask, ‘How do you persuade players to come to Reading?’ McDermott says, ‘I don’t. They have to want to join and to learn.’ If there were more men like Brian McDermott in English football, then it might attract the Pep Guardiolas of this world.
‘There are really two different ways to look at the world,’ he says. ‘When you realise that success is in your own hands, rather than something that happens to you by way of talent, a light goes on in your mind. We never use words like “talent” here. We focus on hard work; how players and staff can grow over time. We may not become Premier League champions, but we will reach our potential.’ Well said, and come on you Royals.
Pep Guardiola and Brian McDermott in the same breath, notice. And of course Premier League manager of the month for January (and ALF Player of the month) !!!!
Excellent piece in GetReading too, of Jonny Fordham’s interview with Anton – management-wise, these guys know what they’re doing, blazing a distinctive trail in (football) management. Trust in people.
(Also interesting because Anton Zingarevic is much more like the Russians I’ve actually met and worked with, than the stereotypical villains typified by Roman Abramovic.)
(*) PS Love Stevie, but he’s never gonna set the world alight as a thinker and speaker.
Values – his words.
When did “existential threat” come to mean “a threat that exists”?
Heard it twice recently – Cameron describing Islamists in Saharan Africa, Copson describing extremists in general.
We do care about the beautiful game of football, but this piece by Seth Godin is about some other televised sport, played with the hands whilst wearing full body armour, weirdly called “football” in just one country in the world.
The tribal culture is a common theme, sure, but I disagree on several points.
Yet real football does benefit enormously from TV investment, for the quantitative, multi-game, multi-angle, non-real-time benefits – even though the real thing is infinitely, qualitatively, better. Wonder which is actually the bigger business – the real thing or the fake version?
Now there’s a turn up for the BHA.
Hopefully enough to make the BHA think about its position.
Hopefully we’re beyond this being “just a bit of fun”.
[Video Here. No time to watch the whole right now, but after Copson vs the outgoing Archbishop, you can already see where the more subtle argument lies. Organized churches as agencies of communal humanity and tradition, BHA same as CofE in this respect. Immediate unmediated communities – social media etc – Â allow freedom of communication and thought, but they bring no “conservative” narrative to the whole (*). Social, cultural and intellectual evolution without conservatism cannot progress, any more than biological evolution, merely change and repeat errors. The “aim” – purpose and meaning – needs to be enshrined “metaphysically” Â (or maybe “transcendentally”) beyond the current process and content – even the concept of humanity beyond individuals – “bigger than themselves”. BHA is currently too naive and “scientistic” about where that value is maintained. Dawkinzzzzz …. when will he let go of childish things …. sarcastic, arrogant, ignorant, dogmatist and childish. How could this debate go any other way? As a humanist I’m embarrassed by the BHA.]
[Having listened on, Copson loses it at 1:07 by saying in his very own words that he is NOT actually for the motion as stated. Hope for him. Unmitigated disaster for the BHA. Tariq Ramadan and most of the students all very impressive. (*) As Douglas Murray says – we’d find ourselves living “The Only Way is Essex”. The opposition wins hands down – anyone know the actual voting numbers?]