2006-12-08 14:52:06 · 24 answers · asked by asphyxia 3 in Education & Reference ➔ Homework Help
Stastics don't lie is grammatically correct, whether or not it is true is open to debate.
2006-12-08 14:57:51 · answer #1 · answered by b_plenge 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The correct way to say it would be statistics don't lie because statistics is plural if you were to use statistic (singular) it would be doesn't
Sorry for the long answer but i figured you would want to know why, that may be the most annoying question in the world but it is also the best question to ask if you really want to learn something
2006-12-08 17:58:04 · answer #2 · answered by Heaven C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the setting you are using here, you are most likely using the word statistics to mean figures or numbers. Because of that you'd say "Statistics DON'T lie", because in this case "statistics" is plural. However, if you meant to refer to the branch of mathematics called Statistics (usually capitalized), you'd be using a collective noun and it would be correct to say "Statistics DOESN'T lie." As a rule the second statement (the one referring to math) is true, but the first (numbers in general) isn't.
2006-12-12 11:40:49 · answer #3 · answered by dmb 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The usual saying is "statistics don't lie". For supporting evidence I did web searches on both forms. Here's what I got:
(1) 36,000 results for "statistics don't lie"
(2) 33 results for "statistics doesn't lie"
I would say that, technically, either one could be correct depending on the intended meaning of the person who is saying it. This is because "statistics" can be either a singular noun or a plural noun. Here is a brief dictionary definition from Yahoo! (see link under "Sources") showing the two senses.
(1) (used with a sing. verb) The mathematics of the collection, organization, and interpretation of numerical data, especially the analysis of population characteristics by inference from sampling.
(2) (used with a pl. verb) Numerical data. [The plural of "statistic".]
It's worth noting that both forms are metaphorical since "lying" implies intent. For someone or some entity to lie (in a non-metaphorical sense) they must be intending to deceive. Neither sense of "statistics" denotes an entity capable of intent.
Sorry. I got carried away. :)
2006-12-08 15:42:25 · answer #4 · answered by pollux 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There are many different ways to lie with statistics. It depends on who's doing the paying. The only way to solve these kinds of "debates" would be to get out pencil paper and calculator, open up a college level statistics book, and ask your "opponent" to join you in looking at the data and statistical analysis. In most cases, (actually the upper ninety percentile range) a hushed silence will follow.
2016-05-22 22:02:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gramatically, I would say "statistics don't lie", but in fact I would say "statistics do lie". You can find numbers that justify just about any point you want to make.
2006-12-08 15:00:15 · answer #6 · answered by DGS 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Statistics don't lie.
2006-12-08 14:56:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Both can be correct. It depends on the context in which you are talking about the statictics.
If you are talking about statistics in general, as a group, then use "doesn't." It is considered a collective noun and requires the third person singular tense.
If you are talking about a bunch of statisitics, then use "don't." In this case you are talking about a number of different statistics and grouping them together.
I hope that makes sense.
2006-12-08 15:00:19 · answer #8 · answered by gpwarren98 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Statistics DO lie. According to Disraeli, there are three types of liars:
Liars
Damned Liars
Statisticians
It would be that they don't lie but they do.
2006-12-08 15:00:56 · answer #9 · answered by fancyname 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
it's don't!
If spelled out all the way it would sound like this.....Statistics does not lie.....Statistics do not lie.
2006-12-08 14:57:18 · answer #10 · answered by kerrberr95 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What happens is that it is rare to have all the information about any one subject. So...you try to get a large enough sample size to be confident that what you have observed is representative of reality. In this business it is possible to demonstrate a particular characteristic, for example a low failure rate, but not be at all confident that this is a reflection of reality. The opposite(inverse) is true. It is possible to be highly confident that an observation is not very representative of reality. The real statistics is all about saying I saw this n number of times and an X % confident that what I observed is a reflection of ground truth.
2006-12-08 15:16:00 · answer #11 · answered by Mike C 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋