4 ms·
> The burden of the proof is always on the person or the organization that cares about something deeply enough that wants to perpetuate such behavior. The bene
by crooked-v 5y ago
> The burden of the proof is always on the person or the organization that cares about something deeply enough that wants to perpetuate such behavior.
The benefits of both seatbelts and vaccines, not just to a single person but to everyone else around them, are proven and well-documented.
You're also still avoiding the initial point, which is that it's nonsensical to claim that people only wear seatbelts out of fear.
> Well...yeah? If you wear a seatbelt while driving in the city chances are that once we get to the club you won't drink, which also means you won't lose inhibitions, which also means that you won't pay for drinks, which also means that you won't find female companionship for the night.
I'm sure since you're talking about burden of proof you have some data to back this up, right?
- GDC7 5y ago> The benefits of both seatbelts and vaccines, not just to a single person but to everyone else around them, are proven and well-documented. Well that's the physics and the immunology part of the science. You still got to do the social science. If you fail that then all the progress done in the lab is moot. The burden of the proof is there even more strongly for the social science. If the organization fails to obtain the desired behavior when the lab work proves that such behavior provides an advantage then that is an even worse failure from the organization. They should look at what they did wrong with their communication.