[perl4ever]

Whether you or I think there is a causation in specific cases is irrelevant, as is whether we apply charged terms like "racism" to certain causal linkages.

The point is that one is not compelled to believe in the causal link just because there is a statistical link.

So if certain causal links are politically contentious, rejecting them due to "political correctness" is completely separate from rejecting the facts, the statistics that are collected. It is political, but not in opposition to reality.

The article, as I understood it, is puncturing the assertion of objectivity by those who implicitly assert we have to regard all correlations as equally causal or else be against reason and logic.

[catalogia]

I certainly do not believe anybody should be compelled to assume a correlation is a causation. However I also do not think one should preemptively rule out the possibility of causation. Without examining the nitty gritty details of any particular situation, we can't know which is the case. We certainly cannot assume one and rule out the other, which I fear is what you assumed I was doing.