Simpson, in his 1951 paper that started all the ruckus, did exactly the same thing that I have just done. He presented two stories with exactly the same data. In one example, it was intuitively clear that aggregating the data was, in his words, “the sensible interpretation”; in the other example, partitioning the data was more sensible. So Simpson understood that there was a paradox, not just a reversal. However, he suggested no resolution to the paradox other than common sense.
