tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14840542.post113234749034222778..comments2008-12-12T21:52:06.056-08:00Transient Gadflyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10313323030838183737noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14840542.post-1134448884689819022005-12-12T20:41:00.000-08:002005-12-12T20:41:00.000-08:00So, I saw an ad for a book called "<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553383469/qid=1130514864/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/002-2953519-0142411?n=283155" REL="nofollow">Odds 'R,</A>" subtitled the "Odds on everything book!" and thought of this blog. The book presents the "odds" on various random things in the form of a multiple choice question:<BR/><BR/>What are the odds that an American woman over the age of 75 has a sexual partner?<BR/><BR/>A) 1 in 3<BR/>B) 1 in 5<BR/>C) 1 in 10<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.oddsrgames.com/about.php" REL="nofollow">There's even a website</A> explaining what the odds mean.<BR/><BR/>So, this made me wonder: is asking the odds on such specific questions as above still a problem within your argument that the "odds" are statistically meaningless because the question was asked within a framework where "meaning" does not correspond to numbers, thus the "odds don’t have the meaning that they appear to have?" <BR/><BR/>I'm actually asking. Really, I just hoped that you thought this book to be stupid. What are the odds that you'll notice this comment on an old post and respond?danhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09552605649625223373noreply@blogger.com