3 ms·

I’m not personally disagreeing as I think I see your point on some level, but I think a lot of smart people strongly disagree and maybe they have a point too.

I’m not personally disagreeing as I think I see your point on some level, but I think a lot of smart people strongly disagree and maybe they have a point too. A lot of people make the argument that extreme low-vulnerability people like e.g. myself have a lot of influence on life or death stakes outcomes for the more vulnerable and are therefore morally responsible for doing some set of things. I’d like to understand how clear the science is on that argument because I neither want to endanger people because I can’t be bothered to make some sacrifices, nor do I want to live in infinite crisis mode if it makes no difference anyways. I’d like to use numbers to guide that decision.

gregjor 5y ago
One of the main reasons COVID has polarized people comes from supposedly smart people telling other people what to do, calling them stupid, science-deniers, etc. Science can't have all the answers, nor can science answer ethical questions. Suppose you had as much unbiased scientific information as you can find. How would that affect your own behavior? How would you protect the "more vulnerable" in a more ethical way? What can you actually do other than get vaccinated, wear a mask, avoid close contact and crowds? All evidence tells us that COVID is highly contagious. If we want to avoid catching it, and to avoid spreading it to others, we need to take steps to prevent infection (vaccination) and staying out of range of everyone. We can't tell at a glance if someone in a store or restaurant is more vulnerable or not (well, maybe based on their apparent age), or if they're "smart", or if they've been vaccinated. I hear debates about how effective masks are, but I choose to wear a mask because it's a minor inconvenience and probably protects me and other people more than not wearing a mask. Knowing the exact percentage of effectiveness (science: inconclusive) doesn't really matter, I assume it's non-zero. COVID is not likely going away, so the only way to eliminate your own risk and the risk of infecting others is to completely isolate, forever. If that's not an option then you take whatever active precautions you can to avoid getting infected and to avoid possibly spreading the infection. I'm not sure what you could do beyond that or what "set of things" you might feel morally obligated to do. Lecturing and hectoring people to get vaccinations and wear masks hasn't really worked. When the COVID outbreak started I took smart person Nassim Taleb's advice. When you see an avalanche coming you don't wait for the science to measure the speed, mass, and direction of the snow -- you run. Assume the virus is highly contagious, anyone can spread it, everyone is vulnerable, and act accordingly.

gregjor 5y ago

One of the main reasons COVID has polarized people comes from supposedly smart people telling other people what to do, calling them stupid, science-deniers, etc. Science can't have all the answers, nor can science answer ethical questions. Suppose you had as much unbiased scientific information as you can find. How would that affect your own behavior? How would you protect the "more vulnerable" in a more ethical way? What can you actually do other than get vaccinated, wear a mask, avoid close contact and crowds? All evidence tells us that COVID is highly contagious. If we want to avoid catching it, and to avoid spreading it to others, we need to take steps to prevent infection (vaccination) and staying out of range of everyone. We can't tell at a glance if someone in a store or restaurant is more vulnerable or not (well, maybe based on their apparent age), or if they're "smart", or if they've been vaccinated. I hear debates about how effective masks are, but I choose to wear a mask because it's a minor inconvenience and probably protects me and other people more than not wearing a mask. Knowing the exact percentage of effectiveness (science: inconclusive) doesn't really matter, I assume it's non-zero. COVID is not likely going away, so the only way to eliminate your own risk and the risk of infecting others is to completely isolate, forever. If that's not an option then you take whatever active precautions you can to avoid getting infected and to avoid possibly spreading the infection. I'm not sure what you could do beyond that or what "set of things" you might feel morally obligated to do. Lecturing and hectoring people to get vaccinations and wear masks hasn't really worked. When the COVID outbreak started I took smart person Nassim Taleb's advice. When you see an avalanche coming you don't wait for the science to measure the speed, mass, and direction of the snow -- you run. Assume the virus is highly contagious, anyone can spread it, everyone is vulnerable, and act accordingly.