# The Right to Understand Uncertainty and Randomness By:: [[Brian Heath]] 2024-02-17 Probability and Statistics is one of the last branches of mathematics to be conceived and developed. It is still young when compared to the likes of Algebra, Geometry, and Calculus. New branches will likely emerge, but it is interesting to think about why Statistics took so long time to develop. Some argue that Statistics needed Algebra and Calculus to be created first, as they are the foundation of many statistical calculations. While the mechanics of algebra and calculus enable many aspects of statistics, there is no reason why the core concepts of uncertainty and randomness couldn't have formed the basis of mathematics that then required the development of algebra and calculus. If one is so inclined, one could imagine a very different mathematical world if one started with uncertainty and randomness versus the certainty and exactness one is exposed to in elementary mathematics lessons (e.g., 1 + 1 must equal 2 versus 1 + 1 might equal 2 or 3). This brings out the most likely reason why Statistics was such a late bloomer: we are not innately programmed to think of the world in terms of uncertainty and randomness. As a case in point, if we were naturally skilled at this way of being and thinking, casinos would not be profitable, and stock markets would be dull places to work. One could argue that these wouldn't exist at all. Additionally, humanity would probably think differently about death, poverty, economics, religion, and associations with teams, political parties, and organizations. All of these are skewed towards the idea of certainty. Still, if we were programmed to view the world as uncertain with elements of randomness, we would have very different ideas about things, such as the reasons for unfortunate events and what happens after we die. We are not programmed this way, so we all struggle with these concepts - even those who spend their lives studying them. Thus, when analysts make statements based on probability, statistics, and the universe's randomness, they often lose people. It's an alien language with words and ideas that do not translate into the realm of human language and thoughts. This limits its pragmatic effectiveness in the majority of human decision-making, even if its rational effectiveness is easy to see for those who study it thoroughly. Again, if there are any doubts, see the casino business model that relies upon people being bad at randomness. The question for humanity is how we should treat this comprehension gap. In the past, we've focused on formal education, but with society deciding to cap formal education at 18, there is only so much that can be taught. Should randomness, as a rational idea that holds so much potential for unfair manipulation and brilliant insights, be limited to only those who can study it in college? Do we have the ethical obligation to ensure that people have a baseline understanding of such ideas? At one point, understanding germ theory was reserved for a privileged few. Eventually, society decided it would be helpful for everyone to know about it. Should randomness and uncertainty not be thought of in the same terms? The potential benefit to society extends beyond limiting people's losses at casinos. It unlocks a way of being to see the many possibilities and, with it, a redefined meaning of fairness, belief, understanding, and solidarity. #### Related Items [[Statistics]] [[Probability]] [[Knowledge]] [[Education]] [[Chaos]] [[Beliefs]] [[Society]] [[Rationality]]