Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

  My random reading in matters mathematical has brought me to Simpson's Paradox, the idea that a clear trend in a group of data can disappear, or even reverse, when different groups of data that taken severally exhibit the same trend are aggregated.  It is named for Edward Simpson, who described the effect in "The Interpretation of Interaction in Contingency Tables" in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society in 1951. Colin Blyth rediscovered this paper and gave the phenomenon the name Simpson's Paradox in a 1972 paper. It was once referenced in an episode of the prime-time cartoon The Simpsons because ... well, the name. Wikipedia has a good discussion. This is not really a "paradox" at all, though the name will probably stick.  It wouldn't impress Zeno, or whoever started the thing about the lying Cretan. But the phrase "Simpson's odd-seeming phenomenon" doesn't seem very resonant.  Good brief discussion in pp. 70 - 72 of Titel...

I have from time to tie opined here about the philosophy of humor. What does it mean for something (say, a brief story with an unexpected reversal at the end) to be funny? Today I'll simply offer a test case for your consideration. Can we agree that this is funny, then worry about why? The Simpsons a few years back did a Halloween episode set in the 1930s. The town of Springfield was ripped apart by panicked mobs after a radio program put together by a young Orson Welles that presented fake news reports of a Martian invasion. The next morning, Orson Welles is on his way out of town. He is met by the police chief who has just been surveying the damage done by the riots. This dialog ensures: Chief Wiggum: Why shouldn't I punch you in the nose, bud?! Orson Wells: (muttering to himself), Nose bud? Hmmmm. Is that funny?

S. Matthew Liao has edited a new book on this subject. Amazon page here: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0199357676/wwwsmatthewli-20/ The various authors of the articles in this collection brief us on recent neurological advances on The Moral Brain, that is, on the neural correlates of moral judgments, and/or they cogitate on the philosophical significance of this work. I haven't read it and have nothing to say about it today but I think I've done my good deed by informing you of a new book on a subject that will likely interest anyone who shares my interest in a lot of the stuff I discuss in this blog. So ... read and enjoy!