I'm never sure how to think about this kind of "numbers only" analysis. On one hand, I've seen these kinds of analyses carried out to explain that people who w

I'm never sure how to think about this kind of "numbers only" analysis. On one hand, I've seen these kinds of analyses carried out to explain that people who worry about exogenous terrorists are "irrational" because other things (e.g. second hand smoke, or a mistake in a prescription medication, or a traffic accident) are more likely to kill an innocent person than such terrorists. On the other hand, people have a value system and a system of priorities. Some kinds of risks just seem unacceptably horrifying to people while other kinds of risks seem tolerable. Is a simple numerical analysis enough to label a line of thinking "irrational" or is it reasonable to make "irrationality" a function of arithmetical division and people's values?