Yesterday’s hypothesis was an “if..then” statement, also known as a conditional statement.
If money makes amazing happen, then the more money we pour into projects the more we will be amazed.
Linear reasoning is popular and for good reason. It works.
When stalling. If you do this then I will do that.
When pleading. If you get up then I will make you your favourite breakfast.
When campaigning for votes. If you vote for me then I will spend more on education and health.
Malcolm Gladwell in David and Goliath writes. “When the governor of California announced sweeping plans to reduce the size of his state’s classes, his popularity doubled within three weeks.”
The job of a scientist is to either reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis, in this case: The amount of money poured into sports projects in England makes no difference to how excited and amazed you are at the provision of sport in England. Simply put, these two things we are looking at have no influence over each other, you feel that way by chance.
I think we all know the tricky bit is when, if….then turns from chance to a promise.
Making a promise is one thing. Doing the work of listing your assumptions and constraints, to understand the conditions under which your promise holds up is quite another.