It Can’t Be A Coincidence!

Recently, co-bloggers Scott Sumner and Kevin Corcoran had a series of excellent posts on causation, coincidence, and identities. Their discussions delved into the idea of coincidence, where two events occur simultaneously without any apparent causation. Coincidence is a common occurrence in our daily lives, and it often leads to humorous situations.

For example, on July 14, I had the best bowling games of my life, scoring 161 and 157, with even the third game at 118 being above average. Interestingly, it was also the first time in months that I had a $5 bill in my pocket. Did the $5 bill somehow cause my improved bowling performance? It may seem unlikely, but the idea of causation in this scenario is amusing.

Similarly, on July 3, the Boston Red Sox paid a visit to Donald Trump at the White House. Subsequently, they went on a winning streak, winning 10 games in a row and moving up in the division standings. Could Trump’s presence have boosted the team’s performance? While it’s tempting to draw a connection, the notion of causation in this case is far-fetched.

Distinguishing between causation and coincidence requires a solid theoretical framework. Theory helps us discern between what is truly causal and what is merely coincidental. However, even rigorously-tested theories can be proven wrong over time. Take, for example, the miasma theory, which attributed diseases to bad air. It took the groundbreaking work of individuals like John Snow to challenge and eventually debunk this long-standing theory.

The quest for determining causation is a complex endeavor. Statistician Judea Pearl has delved into this subject extensively, offering insights into the challenges of establishing causality from a statistical perspective. While the technical aspects can be daunting, his book “The Book of Why” provides a more accessible overview of the history and current state of causation research.

One crucial point to remember is that the phrase “It can’t be a coincidence!” is perhaps one of the least scientific statements one can make. Coincidences are a part of life, and our understanding of causation is often limited by the inherent assumptions in our models. It’s essential to approach claims of causation with humility and a willingness to acknowledge the possibility of being wrong.

In conclusion, the exploration of causation, coincidence, and identities is a fascinating journey that challenges our perceptions and understanding of the world. By embracing uncertainty and remaining open to new evidence and theories, we can continue to unravel the mysteries of causation and coincidence in our lives.