3 ms·
This goes both ways, though. If you act early-- and way over-react-- and it works, you get to claim to be the savior of the country, even though the reaction wa
by christophilus 7y ago
This goes both ways, though. If you act early-- and way over-react-- and it works, you get to claim to be the savior of the country, even though the reaction was disproportionate.
There's no way to disprove it.
- StavrosK 7y agoYou can't "disprove" overreacting, but you can disprove saving the country. Case in point, Italy was not saved. What would overreaction look like? Shutting an entire country down back in December? If your definition of "overreacting" is "shutting down a country before there's a single case", you can definitely prove or disprove that.
- abakker 7y agoThis is true, but also unhelpful. We all make significant choices all the time that cannot be proved effective, these are heuristics and not scientific theorems. The gist is that this is more like avoiding rock climbing because you don't want to fall to your death. It's not likely that you fall to your death rock climbing, but it is MUCH less likely if you never climb. But, you can't know the future, so you can only take actions that are either right or wrong in hindsight.
- torpfactory 7y agoPoint of clarification: Are you saying that there's no way to disprove your claim of being a savior? Or no way to disprove the reaction was disproportionate.?
- x86_64Ubuntu 7y agoBut we have other countries that didn't react at all and their crematoriums have been running non-stop, like Iran, China and Italy. We also have NYC, which has brought in mobile morgues for their dead since the standard system can't handle the overflow. Why are we acting like we don't know what outcome we are trying to defend against?
- casefields 7y agoIran, China, and Spain are all already loosening lockdowns. Pretty weird thing to do if they burning people into ashes nonstop.