Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Helsing
Aug 23, 2003

DON'T POST IN THE ELECTION THREAD UNLESS YOU :love::love::love: JOE BIDEN
They say that new instruments create new sciences - that the development of telescopes created the modern science of astronomy or that better microscopes lead to the development of germ theory - and I think the same is true of the social sciences. In my mind one of the most remarkable aspects of the Enlightenment was the emerge of new paradigms for conceiving of society as a discrete social object that could be viewed from a state-centric top down perspective. Suddenly instead of kingdoms or domains you have populations of individuals and the states that can best manage and control their populations stand in a clear advantage over the states that cannot.

One of the factors underlying this change is the emergence of the modern discipline of statistics. Today we more or less take for granted that you can discover mathematical regularities in society that yield useful predictions or lend themselves to further analysis. However, this was a radical new discovery when it was first made. Keeping track of things like birth and death rates or annual mortality statistics made it possible for scholars and bureaucrats to countenance political goals that would have never even occured to a medieval monarch or their advisers. A new way of understanding society, relying on mathematical analysis of behaviour at the population level, helped create the modern world we take for granted.

From the wikipedia on the history of stats:

Wikipedia, History of Statistics posted:

The birth of statistics is often dated to 1662, when John Graunt, along with William Petty, developed early human statistical and census methods that provided a framework for modern demography. He produced the first life table, giving probabilities of survival to each age. His book Natural and Political Observations Made upon the Bills of Mortality used analysis of the mortality rolls to make the first statistically based estimation of the population of London. He knew that there were around 13,000 funerals per year in London and that three people died per eleven families per year. He estimated from the parish records that the average family size was 8 and calculated that the population of London was about 384,000; this is the first known use of a ratio estimator. Laplace in 1802 estimated the population of France with a similar method; see Ratio estimator § History for details.

Although the original scope of statistics was limited to data useful for governance, the approach was extended to many fields of a scientific or commercial nature during the 19th century. The mathematical foundations for the subject heavily drew on the new probability theory, pioneered in the 16th century by Gerolamo Cardano, Pierre de Fermat and Blaise Pascal. Christiaan Huygens (1657) gave the earliest known scientific treatment of the subject. Jakob Bernoulli's Ars Conjectandi (posthumous, 1713) and Abraham de Moivre's The Doctrine of Chances (1718) treated the subject as a branch of mathematics. In his book Bernoulli introduced the idea of representing complete certainty as one and probability as a number between zero and one.

A key early application of statistics in the 18th century was to the human sex ratio at birth.[6] John Arbuthnot studied this question in 1710.[7][8][9][10] Arbuthnot examined birth records in London for each of the 82 years from 1629 to 1710. In every year, the number of males born in London exceeded the number of females. Considering more male or more female births as equally likely, the probability of the observed outcome is 0.5^82, or about 1 in 4,8360,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000; in modern terms, the p-value. This is vanishingly small, leading Arbuthnot that this was not due to chance, but to divine providence: "From whence it follows, that it is Art, not Chance, that governs." This is and other work by Arbuthnot is credited as "the first use of significance tests"[11] the first example of reasoning about statistical significance and moral certainty,[12] and "… perhaps the first published report of a nonparametric test …",[8] specifically the sign test; see details at Sign test § History.

I've always thought it was really interesting to relate the philosophical and political developments of the early modern period with the development of new ways of viewing society. While many ancient authors wrote on the topic of population sizes or birth rates none of the writings known to us demonstrate the conceptual tools that would have been necessary to develop these scattered observations into an actual science of populations.

Many of the best and worst aspects of the modern world can be traced back to this growing awareness of demographics and the almost inescapable temptation that this knowledge brings to try and consciously manipulate society on a much deeper level than the ancients would have dreamed possible.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply