There's not that many that I know of. I do think its much more intuitive and lets you build more nuanced models that are useful for social sciences. You can fit the exact model that you want instead of needing to fit your case in a preexisting box. However, I don't know of too many examples where th...(read more)
Funny enough, as a direct result of reading the sequences, I got super obsessed with Bayesian stats and that eventually resulted in writing PyMC3 (which is the software used in the book).
If you want to see a billion examples of details mattering, watch anything about shipbuilding by this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM6R81SiKgA
Great description. Yes, I think that's exactly why people are reluctant to see other people's points.
Yeah, I wasn't too specific on that. I do endorse the piece that jb55 quotes below, but I'm still figuring out what to tell people to do. I'll hopefully have more to say in the coming months.
John Maxwell posted this quote:
> The mystery is how a conception of the utility of outcomes that is vulnerable to such obvious counterexamples survived for so long. I can explain it only by a weakness of the scholarly mind that I have often observed in myself. I call it theory-induced blindness: ...(read more)
>I want you to come up to me, put your arm around me, ask me how I am and start telling me about the idea you’ve got. Show me you ought to be in charge, because right now I’m a little lost and you’re not.
My desire is not for some permanent power structure, but for other people to sometimes and tem...(read more)
Yes, I was trying mostly to talk about #2. I like the dominance frame because I think this kind fluid dominance roles is the something like the Proper Use of Dominance. Dominance as enabling swift changes status to track changes in legitimate authority.
Seems like that wasn't really very clear tho...(read more)