4 ms·

> Do we really want to build our society to survive viruses with the fewest causalities or are there perhaps higher ideals (freedom, self determiniation) that w

by yosito 6y ago

> Do we really want to build our society to survive viruses with the fewest causalities or are there perhaps higher ideals (freedom, self determiniation) that we should aspire to? I don't see why these have to be mutually exclusive goals. Arguably, there are better ways to get an entire society to cooperate toward a goal without resorting to authoritarianism. This sort of societal engineering is demonstrated in religions, cults, and political tribes all the time. If we can harness it at the scale of an entire country, or even a majority of the world, we could accomplish quite a lot. It's been done before, and today's technology could theoretically enable it at a level that's never been seen in human history. Though we currently seem to be experiencing more of the dark side of the whole phenomenon.

ryandrake 6y ago
I don't understand the whole "freedom" argument against basic public health and safety guidance. Almost everyone wears their seatbelt in a car and doesn't complain about how their freedoms are being taken away in the name of safety. So why is this not the same with masks and distancing? Why is it that people think refusing to wear a mask transforms them into Braveheart, fighting for freedom against oppression? Sensible precautions against an airborne deadly pandemic are not attacks on self determination.
- ModernMech 6y ago
  It's just because masks are new. People had the same negative reaction to seatbelts when they were first introduced, citing inane things like "it might wrinkle my shirt" as a reason not to wear them. https://www.businessinsider.com/seatbelt-car-habit-obligation-law-car-pandemic-lockdown-protection-cover-personality-comfort https://www.businessinsider.com/seatbelt-car-habit-obligatio...
- shuntress 6y ago
  >Why is it that people think refusing to wear a mask transforms them into Braveheart Because that was the message in the echo chamber they didn't know they were in.
- throwawayboise 6y ago
  Because masks were promoted as protecting others, not the wearer. This didn't recognize that people put their own needs ahead of others. Seat belts can protect me in an accident. So I wear them. With masks, (especially if I am young and not at much risk) I think "if someone is afraid of the virus, they can just stay home, why do I need to change what I do?"
- Mediterraneo10 6y ago
  > Why is it that people think refusing to wear a mask transforms them into Braveheart, fighting for freedom against oppression? 1) In my country, some of the same scientific advisors to the government on the COVID response, are also criticizing the government for requiring masks to be worn outdoors in deserted streets, even though the science says that the risk of transmission there is negligible. They say that this kind of "hygiene theatre" can ultimately diminish the state's authority to mount efforts that truly matter to stopping the spread. A problem is that the outdoor mask law also appears to discourage outdoor exercise (even if people could exercise in a mask, the psychological barrier is real), and exercise is something public-health experts naturally want to encourage, even during the pandemic. 2) In some countries, the authorities have eased up on restrictions, or kept them on the books but ceased enforcing them, after the broad population flaunted them. Ruling parties are sensitive to what the population is willing to accept, lest unpopular restrictions cost them the next election. Now put those two facts together, and people refusing en masse to wear a mask outdoors (while continuing to responsibly wear masks in crowded open areas and in indoor spaces like shops and other people’s homes) might be effective in ending a measure that even actual public-health experts say is pointless and oppressive.
slibhb 6y ago
It seems clear to me that "religions, cults, and political tribes" that enforce uniform behavior are by definition restricting freedom. Which is not to say that freedom is never worth restricting. My general point was that I prefer American notions of freedom to East Asian notions of freedom.
- mcculley 6y ago
  This is a false dichotomy. We don't have only U.S. apathy and East Asian collectivism as our choices. We could invest in public health infrastructure. We won't, but that is another topic.
- yosito 6y ago
  Plato's famous works were about this. One of his ideas was to create the perfect state in which good behavior didn't have to be enforced by laws, by instilling people with an internal sense of morality that they willingly want to follow. Early Judeo-Christian societies were built around this idea. If people are doing what they want to do, and that aligns with what society needs them to do, then their freedom doesn't have to be restricted.
  - slibhb 6y ago
    Yes, The Republic, and Plato's last dialogue is called Laws and it describes a state governed by laws. Judeo-Christian societies were and are based on deontology i.e. the ten commandments. What you're talking about is the harmonization of all interests around a single ideal, something that never ends well (including Plato's attempt in Syracuse). It's been criticized to death by liberal philosophers, in my opinion rightly.

by yosito 6y ago

ryandrake 6y ago

I don't understand the whole "freedom" argument against basic public health and safety guidance. Almost everyone wears their seatbelt in a car and doesn't complain about how their freedoms are being taken away in the name of safety. So why is this not the same with masks and distancing? Why is it that people think refusing to wear a mask transforms them into Braveheart, fighting for freedom against oppression? Sensible precautions against an airborne deadly pandemic are not attacks on self determination.

ModernMech 6y ago
It's just because masks are new. People had the same negative reaction to seatbelts when they were first introduced, citing inane things like "it might wrinkle my shirt" as a reason not to wear them. https://www.businessinsider.com/seatbelt-car-habit-obligation-law-car-pandemic-lockdown-protection-cover-personality-comfort https://www.businessinsider.com/seatbelt-car-habit-obligatio...
shuntress 6y ago
>Why is it that people think refusing to wear a mask transforms them into Braveheart Because that was the message in the echo chamber they didn't know they were in.
throwawayboise 6y ago
Because masks were promoted as protecting others, not the wearer. This didn't recognize that people put their own needs ahead of others. Seat belts can protect me in an accident. So I wear them. With masks, (especially if I am young and not at much risk) I think "if someone is afraid of the virus, they can just stay home, why do I need to change what I do?"
Mediterraneo10 6y ago
> Why is it that people think refusing to wear a mask transforms them into Braveheart, fighting for freedom against oppression? 1) In my country, some of the same scientific advisors to the government on the COVID response, are also criticizing the government for requiring masks to be worn outdoors in deserted streets, even though the science says that the risk of transmission there is negligible. They say that this kind of "hygiene theatre" can ultimately diminish the state's authority to mount efforts that truly matter to stopping the spread. A problem is that the outdoor mask law also appears to discourage outdoor exercise (even if people could exercise in a mask, the psychological barrier is real), and exercise is something public-health experts naturally want to encourage, even during the pandemic. 2) In some countries, the authorities have eased up on restrictions, or kept them on the books but ceased enforcing them, after the broad population flaunted them. Ruling parties are sensitive to what the population is willing to accept, lest unpopular restrictions cost them the next election. Now put those two facts together, and people refusing en masse to wear a mask outdoors (while continuing to responsibly wear masks in crowded open areas and in indoor spaces like shops and other people’s homes) might be effective in ending a measure that even actual public-health experts say is pointless and oppressive.

slibhb 6y ago

It seems clear to me that "religions, cults, and political tribes" that enforce uniform behavior are by definition restricting freedom. Which is not to say that freedom is never worth restricting. My general point was that I prefer American notions of freedom to East Asian notions of freedom.

mcculley 6y ago
This is a false dichotomy. We don't have only U.S. apathy and East Asian collectivism as our choices. We could invest in public health infrastructure. We won't, but that is another topic.
yosito 6y ago
Plato's famous works were about this. One of his ideas was to create the perfect state in which good behavior didn't have to be enforced by laws, by instilling people with an internal sense of morality that they willingly want to follow. Early Judeo-Christian societies were built around this idea. If people are doing what they want to do, and that aligns with what society needs them to do, then their freedom doesn't have to be restricted.
- slibhb 6y ago
  Yes, The Republic, and Plato's last dialogue is called Laws and it describes a state governed by laws. Judeo-Christian societies were and are based on deontology i.e. the ten commandments. What you're talking about is the harmonization of all interests around a single ideal, something that never ends well (including Plato's attempt in Syracuse). It's been criticized to death by liberal philosophers, in my opinion rightly.