Richard Golian

1995-born. Charles University alum. Head of Performance at Mixit. 10+ years in marketing and data.

Castellano Français Slovenčina

Manage subscription Choose a plan

RSS
Newsletter
New articles to your inbox

Article

I am Surprised by the Confident Use of Words Like Certainty and Causality

Data, statistics and knowledge limits
Richard Golian
Richard Golian · 2 477 reads
Hi, I am Richard. On this blog, I share thoughts, personal stories, findings and what I am working on. I hope this article brings you some value.
Listen to this article
0:00 / 0:00

Today I came across a post on LinkedIn by a digital specialist. He confidently claimed that with an A/B test, we can determine not just correlation, but true causality. He used words like “certainty” as if statistics were part of Newtonian physics, clear, absolute, unquestionable. I am surprised by that level of confidence. I do not have it.

We See Causes Where There Are None

Our brain craves order. When something happens after something else, we instinctively think: “the first thing caused the second.” Got a headache? Must’ve been the coffee. We are built to look for causes, even when they are not there.

From an evolutionary perspective, this makes perfect sense. If you hear a rustle in the bushes, it is safer to assume there is a tiger and run, even if it is just the wind. Evolution has taught us it is better to be wrong than dead. Maybe that is why we tend to see patterns in randomness, connections in the unconnected.

In the Middle Ages, people believed comets brought disaster. Halley’s Comet appeared in 1066, followed by the Battle of Hastings. Case closed.

Continue

Continue reading for free

Enter your email to keep reading for free. This also subscribes you to my monthly newsletter. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.

Common questions on this article's topic

Why is the confident use of the word certainty problematic?
Because certainty is far rarer than commonly assumed. In the article, a LinkedIn post by a digital specialist who claimed A/B tests can determine true causality prompts the reflection: statistics operates in probabilities, not absolutes. Even well-designed experiments produce higher probability, not certainty. Confusing statistical significance with proof leads to overconfident decisions based on incomplete understanding.
What is the difference between correlation and causation?
Correlation means two things occur together; causation means one actually produces the other. David Hume argued in the 18th century that we never directly observe causality. We only observe that B follows A repeatedly and assume a causal link. In the article, this philosophical insight is applied to modern marketing and data analysis: statistics can show that two variables are related, but not which one causes the other.
Why does the human brain see causes where there are none?
From an evolutionary perspective, assuming causation was safer than ignoring potential threats. If a rustle in the bushes might be a predator, it is better to run and be wrong than to stay and be dead. In the article, this survival mechanism is identified as the root of a persistent cognitive bias: we instinctively look for causes in random events, see patterns in noise, and construct explanations where none exist.
Can A/B tests prove causation?
A/B tests provide stronger evidence than observational studies because they use randomisation to control for confounding variables. However, they still operate within probability. They increase confidence that a difference is real, but they do not deliver absolute certainty. In the article, the claim that A/B tests determine true causality is challenged: even experiments produce higher probability, not proof in the Newtonian sense.
What does David Hume say about causality?
Hume argued in A Treatise of Human Nature (1739) and An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748) that we never perceive causation directly. We observe constant conjunction, that B regularly follows A, and our minds create the expectation of a necessary connection. But this connection is a habit of thought, not an observed fact. In the article, this insight is applied to challenge the casual use of the word causality in data-driven fields.
Why does this matter for professionals working with data?
Because overconfident causal claims lead to wrong decisions. In the article, the concern is that professionals in marketing and data analysis use words like certainty and causality as if they were dealing with Newtonian physics, clear, absolute, unquestionable. This false confidence can result in strategies built on correlations mistaken for causes, optimisations based on incomplete understanding, and a culture where questioning assumptions is discouraged.
Richard Golian

If you have any thoughts, questions, or feedback, feel free to drop me a message at mail@richardgolian.com.

Related articles

Is AI Making Us Dumber?

I have conducted roughly one hundred and fifty practical interviews over the past four years. Fifty for data specialist roles. A hundred for advertising and performance marketing specialists. Almost every one of them involved sitting down with a candidate over a practical task, something close to a real problem we actually need to solve at the company. Not theory. Not trivia. Applied problem-solving. Over time, I started noticing a pattern.

14 April 2026·1 032 reads
What AI Hides From You

Before you can teach AI to understand anything, you need to see what it is hiding from you.

11 April 2026·1 064 reads
We Are Weak and They Know It

Manipulation without the feeling of being manipulated is the most effective kind.

28 February 2026 ·1 507 reads

More articles

Dependent on AI: Are We Still Masters, or Slaves?

I have Heidegger and my notebook beside me. I am asking where all of this is heading, where artificial intelligence is taking us.

21 June 2026·153 reads
Which Work Will AI Not Replace?

Seventy per cent. That is where the first AI output begins, even when you give it the full company context and the best examples from the past. We are talking about the kind of output that cannot be defined programmatically. It is more complex. Often it is creative work. On one repeated type of output I reached eighty per cent within a week. Every further percentage point is harder than the one before.

10 June 2026·299 reads
Dead internet: will we return offline?

For a long time we treated the internet as the main road. The place where work and relationships happen. Yet most of what we see on it today is, or soon will be, AI-generated: text, images, profiles and comments. The internet is turning into an online game full of bots, where you cannot be sure that a human is on the other side of anything. So I ask: was the online world the main road, or only a temporary detour that part of us will return from, back offline?

7 June 2026·346 reads
The Gap Between Professionals in the AI Era

A few days ago I interviewed a senior marketer. An experienced man, years of practice. I asked him about AI. He said he barely uses it. He had one bad experience with the output and decided he was too senior for it to add value when it is not perfect. I know the other side too: professionals who automate everything that can be automated.

6 June 2026·412 reads
Europe Is Not Ready for Drone Warfare

Europe does not have the capacity to face a full-scale, mass drone war of the kind we see in Ukraine. Three dependencies weaken it: China supplies the physical material for defence systems, the United States supplies capabilities Europe does not have, and twenty-seven states cannot agree how fast, or who pays. Rearmament plans exist, but they are being carried out slowly.

31 May 2026·377 reads
Can AI Replace Human Judgement?

AI produces the graphic, the newsletter and the product page faster than a person. What is left for the one who used to do it is the judgement, knowing whether the output is good. But most people have worse judgement than AI. And whoever cannot judge quality cannot delegate either. How do you tell whether yours is the judgement a company relies on, or the kind it can replace?

30 May 2026·380 reads
What Determines a Stock Price?

In April, in the first part of this series, I wrote about an AI prediction system I had started building on my own machine. At the time the software was a few hours old and the prediction record was empty. The record since then has shown one thing: the system does not yet understand the market it is being asked to forecast. It can pull macro context, book value, earnings. But it cannot put those together into something that helps it understand the price.

23 May 2026·426 reads
Where the Money Goes When AI Takes the Work

Prague, 13 May 2026. On my way to work I started thinking about something that stayed with me for days. If most routine work on a computer disappears in the next ten years, and a large share of repetitive manual work disappears with it, what happens to the flow of money? Who pays whom for what? Which economic layers will exist, how large will they be, and what relationships will run between them? This is the six-layer map I sketched as an answer.

15 May 2026·1 038 reads
Can AI Predict the Stock Market? Building a Calibrated System

I am building an AI system to predict the S&P 500. It runs on my own machine, uses free public data (yfinance, FRED, the Shiller dataset), and grades every forecast against reality. This series documents the build itself: the decisions, the methodology, the mistakes. What I will eventually share from the running system is a separate question, and an honest one.

26 April 2026·978 reads
AI sales forecast: 9 traps so far

Yesterday I could not tear myself away from the computer. When I lifted my head, it was half past eight in the evening. I had been sitting alone upstairs for about three hours.

25 April 2026·915 reads
Full AI agents or fully offline.

Four days in Catalonia. No computer, no AI, almost no social media. I bought this notebook so that I could write down what I would think about, and what I would come across and learn on the trip.

10.5.2026·665 reads
NEWSLETTER
What I write about, what I am working on, what I learned.
Sent the first Sunday of the month. Unsubscribe anytime.