3 ms·

> it's clear that they aren't actually making rational decisions as much as rationalizing their decisions Because one does not reach the same conclusion as you

> it's clear that they aren't actually making rational decisions as much as rationalizing their decisions Because one does not reach the same conclusion as you does not make their conclusion automatically irrational. A very large part of the online community is irrational indeed. Irrational about the true danger of the virus. I am not scared of the virus. I am scared of how scared people are of it. All children who died of Covid-19 were already seriously ill https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/all-children-who-died-of-covid-19-were-already-seriously-ill-jlxr8mkxq https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/all-children-who-died-of-... In Ireland: Median age of death is 84. 94% with underlying condition(s) https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/casesinireland/epidemiologyofcovid-19inireland/COVID-19%20Daily%20epidemiology%20report%20(NPHET)%20v1.0_20200825%20-%20website.pdf https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronav... 54% of San Francisco storefronts have closed https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Half-of-all-San-Francisco-storefronts-have-closed-15513726.php https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Half-of-all-San-Fran... The lockdowns and doom seem 1000x more irrational to me.

longerthoughts 6y ago
> Because one does not reach the same conclusion as you does not make their conclusion automatically irrational. > A very large part of the online community is irrational indeed. Irrational about the true danger of the virus. Pick one. It’s hard to be persuasive when you hold your critics to a higher standard than you hold yourself.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
bingo! I fear that people are encouraging and instilling agoraphobia. There’s unmeasurable effects of all this hysteria and confinement. And if the over-cautious lockdown side is going to assume worst-case scenarios of covid, let’s assume worst-case scenarios for the cost and side-effects lockdown - the true worst-case is that the benefit is marginal and we suffer every drawback.
- edmundsauto 6y ago
  It's not clear that the current economic situation would be better if we let everyone out and suffered all the death and negative long term health outcomes that may still lurk in apparently benign cases.
  - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
    I appreciate the side that has humility. An ability to entertain that they're wrong. It should be clear to people that at pretty much every stage, people have missed the mark massively on predictions. The experts haven't been too helpful and really seem to be even worse than no advice. The US regulatory state stood in the way of states offering testing as quickly as possible. It's been a bungled mess and "but Trump" is all too easy and convenient.
    - edmundsauto 6y ago
      Which people, which mark, have been wrong? What's happening (excepting the stock market) all seems to be pretty in line with the expectations I had around April. I also don't agree that the experts have been unhelpful, and strongly disagree that they have been worse than no advice. They have been fought at every turn by people who don't understand epidemiology. I think it's pretty clear that if we had actually listened to the public health experts, we (in the US) would be in much better shape. Trump (who you brought up) bears some of this responsibility for doing something so stupid as to politicize masks. He bears more blame because he appears to interfere with and try to adjust the science messaging to fit his narrative, which serves to confuse people. So no - the experts haven't been wrong. We've just not spent much time listening to them.
      - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        > They have been fought at every turn by people who don't understand epidemiology. Didn't Fauci discourage mask usage at the worst time to discourage mask usage? Weren't the experts continuously downplaying the danger while Trump was shutting down flights? Wasn't Pelosi, de Blasio and crew telling us to "hug asians" and jump on the subway? I'm not claiming there's anyone who was right in this mess, but there's very little ground to say anyone managed this correctly or would have been better equipped. The supposed Democratic utopias in this country (NJ and NYC) killed off the elderly. And people want Cuomo to run for president...
WalterSear 6y ago
> Because one does not reach the same conclusion as you does not make their conclusion automatically irrational. I didn't, initially, fault their conclusion. However, I noted that their conclusions consistently and increasingly favoured their immediate self-interest, regardless of what else was happening. Another thing I noticed, in the same people and the same situations, is a difficulty noticing any nuance regarding the issue. When I presented them with something, instead of addressing it, they would react to the threat they perceive. To me, this also suggests that they are arguing from their thesis, rather than the situation.

longerthoughts 6y ago

> Because one does not reach the same conclusion as you does not make their conclusion automatically irrational. > A very large part of the online community is irrational indeed. Irrational about the true danger of the virus. Pick one. It’s hard to be persuasive when you hold your critics to a higher standard than you hold yourself.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago

bingo! I fear that people are encouraging and instilling agoraphobia. There’s unmeasurable effects of all this hysteria and confinement. And if the over-cautious lockdown side is going to assume worst-case scenarios of covid, let’s assume worst-case scenarios for the cost and side-effects lockdown - the true worst-case is that the benefit is marginal and we suffer every drawback.

edmundsauto 6y ago
It's not clear that the current economic situation would be better if we let everyone out and suffered all the death and negative long term health outcomes that may still lurk in apparently benign cases.
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
  I appreciate the side that has humility. An ability to entertain that they're wrong. It should be clear to people that at pretty much every stage, people have missed the mark massively on predictions. The experts haven't been too helpful and really seem to be even worse than no advice. The US regulatory state stood in the way of states offering testing as quickly as possible. It's been a bungled mess and "but Trump" is all too easy and convenient.
  - edmundsauto 6y ago
    Which people, which mark, have been wrong? What's happening (excepting the stock market) all seems to be pretty in line with the expectations I had around April. I also don't agree that the experts have been unhelpful, and strongly disagree that they have been worse than no advice. They have been fought at every turn by people who don't understand epidemiology. I think it's pretty clear that if we had actually listened to the public health experts, we (in the US) would be in much better shape. Trump (who you brought up) bears some of this responsibility for doing something so stupid as to politicize masks. He bears more blame because he appears to interfere with and try to adjust the science messaging to fit his narrative, which serves to confuse people. So no - the experts haven't been wrong. We've just not spent much time listening to them.
    - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
      > They have been fought at every turn by people who don't understand epidemiology. Didn't Fauci discourage mask usage at the worst time to discourage mask usage? Weren't the experts continuously downplaying the danger while Trump was shutting down flights? Wasn't Pelosi, de Blasio and crew telling us to "hug asians" and jump on the subway? I'm not claiming there's anyone who was right in this mess, but there's very little ground to say anyone managed this correctly or would have been better equipped. The supposed Democratic utopias in this country (NJ and NYC) killed off the elderly. And people want Cuomo to run for president...

WalterSear 6y ago

> Because one does not reach the same conclusion as you does not make their conclusion automatically irrational. I didn't, initially, fault their conclusion. However, I noted that their conclusions consistently and increasingly favoured their immediate self-interest, regardless of what else was happening. Another thing I noticed, in the same people and the same situations, is a difficulty noticing any nuance regarding the issue. When I presented them with something, instead of addressing it, they would react to the threat they perceive. To me, this also suggests that they are arguing from their thesis, rather than the situation.