Quote:
Originally posted by blueangel
It is a shame that this topic can't be discussed rationally. If anyone would like to disagree with the point of view I have presented, please provide statistics to back up your arguments as I have done.
I do ask that you please refrain from cursing. I have not been disrespectful to any of the posters here, and I ask that those replying to my posts, please give me that same courtesy.
Thank you.
|
OK - I'm being earnest here, I'd like to hear from you about why you're presenting this as you are. I'm somewhat confused, and would like to understand slightly better - I'll return the favor if you wish to ask me questions. How's that for a trade?
How about you address these points regarding methodology:
-A study with a 45% margin of error (ie "40 to 85% higher rate of divorce") . . . what exactly would be the pertinence of this particular study?
-How can you account for the number of marriages that do not result in divorce, but for all intents and purposes are 'unhappy' and would result in divorce without children and/or religion? Wouldn't you like to know these numbers before you address the underlying issues?
----As a proviso to this, do the studies take into account the potential for couples to become married because of an out-of-wedlock child (many of which would cut the 'living together' stage out completely), or other such 'outlier' situations that would alter data points?
----I should explain this better - for completeness, the 'type of marriage' and 'reason for divorce' would have to be fully explored to create a typographical element to the study, and these would be implicitly subjective. Not good science. Also, there is no true adequate availability for control, since you're comparing across the sample . . .
-How do you address correlation/causation fallacies? Because the studies do not, in any way, address causation, according to the abstracts I've read (no time to delve deeper right now).
-If these studies are so comprehensive, why has there been no attempt in the science community to examine the differences across different strata to isolate the underlying causative elements between different cultures, areas, or even demographics? Why do they stop in 95? Is there a reason for the recent decreases in divorce over the past decade? Have the cohabitation numbers changed accordingly? etc etc etc
-Why are we attributing such a monster negative connotation to divorce? The studies really have no bearing on the quality of life for those that live together versus those that don't, and to say otherwise is applying personal feelings to science, further corrupting the validity of the studies.
Bottom line: these statistics are somewhat fallacious when applied to the arguments above, and when added to the previous "two-year rule" make me seriously doubt that you've considered the ramifications of the data. This is unfortunate, because you drilled the point about career on the nose . . .
Linear Mode
