By Darrell Huff

Darrell Huff runs the gamut of each popularly used kind of statistic, probes things like the pattern learn, the tabulation process, the interview process, or the way in which effects are derived from the figures, and issues up the numerous variety of dodges that are used to idiot instead of to inform.

Show description

Read Online or Download How to Lie with Statistics PDF

Best logic books

Statistical Estimation of Epidemiological Risk (Statistics in Practice)

Statistical Estimation of Epidemiological Risk provides insurance of an important epidemiological indices, and contains fresh advancements within the field. A useful reference resource for biostatisticians and epidemiologists operating in illness prevention, because the chapters are self-contained and have a number of genuine examples.

An Invitation to Formal Reasoning

This paintings introduces the topic of formal common sense when it comes to a method that's "like syllogistic logic". Its approach, like out of date, conventional syllogistic, is a "term logic". The authors' model of good judgment ("term-function logic", TFL) stocks with Aristotle's syllogistic the perception that the logical different types of statements which are fascinated by inferences as premises or conclusions might be construed because the results of connecting pairs of phrases by way of a logical copula (functor).

Extra resources for How to Lie with Statistics

Example text

These connectives are also used to tie together a variety of mathematical statements. A good understanding of these logical connectives will allow us to more easily understand and construct mathematical proofs. 2 1. 2. 3. 4. Using truth tables, show that ¬(P → Q) ⇔ (P ∧ ¬Q). Construct truth tables to show that (P ↔ Q) ⇔ (P → Q) ∧ (Q → P). Using truth tables, show that P ⇔ (¬P → (Q ∧ ¬Q)). Which of the following statements are true and which are false? (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (π 2 > 9) → (π > 3). If 3 ≥ 2, then 3 ≥ 1.

Show that the following argument is invalid: (a) If x ≥ 2, then x ≥ 0. (b) x ≥ 0. Therefore, x ≥ 2. Solution. Assertion (a) is a true statement. Let x = 1. Thus (b) is also true, while the conclusion is false. So the argument is invalid. Example 6 (Converse Error). Show that the argument P→Q Q ∴P is invalid. 3 Valid and Invalid Arguments 23 Solution. Assign the truth values of P, Q to be F, T respectively. With this truth assignment we see that the conclusion is false while all of the premises are true.

Thus, the statement D(9, 27) is true and D(9, 5) is false. The domain of a predicate is just the collection of allowed values for the variable(s) in the predicate. So, the domain of the predicate T (x) is the collection of all people. 3). Example 1. Consider the three predicates P(x), E(x), and D(x, y) given by • P(x) symbolizes the statement “x is a prime number” • E(x) symbolizes the statement “x is even” • D(x, y) symbolizes the statement “x evenly divides y” where x and y represent integers.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.36 of 5 – based on 15 votes