3 ms·

I’m anti-mandate (on philosophical grounds not safety grounds). Those are anti-safety philosophical grounds, though. Without mandates we'd have significantly h

by pvg 4y ago

I’m anti-mandate (on philosophical grounds not safety grounds). Those are anti-safety philosophical grounds, though. Without mandates we'd have significantly higher child morality. We'd also be talking about smallpox rather than monkeypox outbreaks.

sokoloff 4y ago
Indeed liberty and safety, both desirable qualities in isolation, are in tension here. Different people can have different philosophies about the optimal tradeoff. Some would choose safety over liberty; others liberty over safety.
- pvg 4y ago
  People who used to die from smallpox tended to end up with little in the way of autonomy or liberty and generally did not have a choice in the matter.
tresqotheq 4y ago
>Those are anti-safety philosophical grounds, Not really, because this argument implies that a human being is in danger if not vaccinated. Which is not really the case, because there is a thing called "Natural Immunity", which fights off thousands of pathogens every day. A vaccine is like wearing a bullet proof pendant on top of a kevlar vest. It can save your life if you are hit by a bullet exactly on the pendant, AND your vest happen to have a weak spot exactly behind the pendant.
- pvg 4y ago
  No, a vaccine is not like wearing any kind of vest because controlling infectious disease is a population-wide endeavor. And again, some people had natural immunity to smallpox. It also killed several 100 million people in the last century alone. The analogies and abstractions tend to obscure the implications of the commenters professed ideals. Nobody ever seems to say 'I believe in absolute bodily autonomy and don't mind it precludes the eradication of one of the deadliest diseases to ever plague humankind'.
  - strangethrawy 4y ago
    > a vaccine is not like wearing any kind of vest No, I said natural immunity is like a vest. Vaccine is like wearing a tiny pendant on top of this vest.
    - pvg 4y ago
      That changes everything.

by pvg 4y ago

sokoloff 4y ago

Indeed liberty and safety, both desirable qualities in isolation, are in tension here. Different people can have different philosophies about the optimal tradeoff. Some would choose safety over liberty; others liberty over safety.

pvg 4y ago
People who used to die from smallpox tended to end up with little in the way of autonomy or liberty and generally did not have a choice in the matter.

tresqotheq 4y ago

>Those are anti-safety philosophical grounds, Not really, because this argument implies that a human being is in danger if not vaccinated. Which is not really the case, because there is a thing called "Natural Immunity", which fights off thousands of pathogens every day. A vaccine is like wearing a bullet proof pendant on top of a kevlar vest. It can save your life if you are hit by a bullet exactly on the pendant, AND your vest happen to have a weak spot exactly behind the pendant.

pvg 4y ago
No, a vaccine is not like wearing any kind of vest because controlling infectious disease is a population-wide endeavor. And again, some people had natural immunity to smallpox. It also killed several 100 million people in the last century alone. The analogies and abstractions tend to obscure the implications of the commenters professed ideals. Nobody ever seems to say 'I believe in absolute bodily autonomy and don't mind it precludes the eradication of one of the deadliest diseases to ever plague humankind'.
- strangethrawy 4y ago
  > a vaccine is not like wearing any kind of vest No, I said natural immunity is like a vest. Vaccine is like wearing a tiny pendant on top of this vest.
  - pvg 4y ago
    That changes everything.