I didn't last for a long time because, quite frankly, there's only so much mooning one can do over logical transition of y = mx + b to yHat = a + bx. I played with some numbers in SPSS (a statical program for social sciences) and watched the rotation of yHat's line from here to there. And the guy who sits three seats over and one row back (y = 1/3x) said that I was weird. I wasn't too weird when he was frustrated later and didn't understand.

Why do we have statistics? So politicians and corporations can lie. So "They" can do a "Study" and prove that x causes y; never mind that another "They" did a different "Study" and proved a different x causes that y.

There's a reality check involved. It's called practical significance. In the Netherlands, scientists noted that during the same year the birthrate dropped significantly, the number of storks also dropped significantly. Regression can show causality, but reality says otherwise.

Samma-Ditthi. Whole vision. Right Understanding. What does reality look like? What does reality mean? Mead talked about symbols and how, every waking moment, we reinterpreted reality based on the symbols we encountered throughout the day. There is a solid reality, I think, one that has nothing to do with symbolic interaction and everything to do with that's the way it is. Sing it, Celine. The number of storks in the Netherlands has nothing to do with the birth rate. Too many ob/gyns have independently verified that babies come from their mommy's bellies. It's empirical. So is reality. You can see it, taste it, smell it (especially the stinky feet). Underneath all of the meanings we assign to the symbols we see, there is just the thing. It is what it is, independent of what I expect it should be. That is Samma-Ditthi. Reality is what it is and to understand it, look at what it is, not what I am.