Whitehead on "random" sampling

"no sample is 'random'; it has only followed a complex method. A finite number of samples each following some method of its own, however complex each method may be, will give a statistical result entirely dependent upon those methods. In so far as repetitions of so-called random samplings give concordant results, the only conclusion to be drawn is that there is a relevant, though concealed, analogy between the 'random' methods." -- Process and Reality, pp. 233-234


  1. I disagree with the glorious Whitehead: there are physical processes which--as far as we know--are mathematically random, as guaranteed by the theoretical support we have that best explains them. A perceptible physical occurrence governed by such a physical process is indeed random, and should be called so.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Central Planning Works!

The biggest intellectual nothing burger of the last century?