I believe you missed my point. I also believe I did not explain it well. Everyone knows data is needed to help understand issues. I would never argue that.1, never stop fishing to respond to me..
2. when a narrative can be proven wrong with data the narrative must be discarded. no matter how much of a beloved sacred cow it is to people.
I am saying people often use data to justify the actions or beliefs they have about certain things. Even if they are interpreting the data correctly, those actions do little to change the underlying driver or cause of the statistic they are referencing.
I am not going to call out what data or narrative I believe you are referencing. I’ll let you decide if you want to go that route. If I had to hazard a guess though, it would be that the actions of some (say the police) or some folks beliefs about certain groups of people, are justified because of raw statistics you can cite.
Great, but does that justify unjust actions against individuals? Furthermore, does putting blinders on to the driver of why the statistics you cite exist and may have a hand in perpetuating erase your argument for the actions or belief of some about others? I think it does.
What I am saying is data is a powerful tool. I know, I use it every day in my line of work. You have to be honest about how it is being used and interpreted though. Just because X exists, does no always mean Y is justified. Especially if Y results in actions like the unjust murder of an individual. Shouldn’t we try and understand why X exists? Or does looking at X make us uncomfortable because our society is a big driver of why it exists in the first place?
Big tide this morning was a bust but I was looking for salmon on MA 10 in June. A tough proposition to start with. I should be able to fish a little bit of the incoming later for SRC. We’ll see if that plays out better.