3 ms·

It’s a weird claim in this context especially because Asians are statistically involved in fewer major accidents.

• pfannkuchen 1y ago
  The sort of driving issues that recent first generation learners have is different from the sort of issues that people who drive into trees while speeding or engage in DUI have. These can both be true at the same time. I know everyone is morally allergic to any statement pointing out group differences, even ones that are not about innate differences, and the mind will gravitate towards any other available explanation.
  • yibg 1y ago
    The allergy is to broad claims without evidence. Point to some data that indicates more insurance money is paid out to Chinese drivers then we can have an actual discussion.
    • pfannkuchen 1y ago
      Insurance companies do not externally publish data aggregated by the relevant dimensions, and they do not publish raw data for us to aggregate ourselves. Let’s for a moment take as a premise that what I’m saying is true. In that version of reality, with all else held constant from our current known reality, would we expect the data publishing to be any different from what we see? It is a politically sensitive topic, after all. Which is to say, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I won’t publish a book on this topic due to lack of sources. I think discussing it on an Internet forum is acceptable? I maintain that the impulse to demand sources in such a case comes from moral offense which is then misattributed to epistemological structure offense.
      • yibg 1y ago
        There is a burden of proof. You can claim whatever, doesn't mean others have to believe you. I can say short people are involved in more accidents than tall people. That's as supported as your claim. I would expect people to dismiss my claim just like yours.
        • pfannkuchen 1y ago
          There isn’t a burden of proof on the internet. You can say “I haven’t seen that effect, and therefore I disagree”. And I can’t stop you. If you haven’t seen that effect, perhaps your experience is more representative. You can’t say “you don’t have a study to back up your account of your lived experience, and therefore you can’t make small scale explanatory suggestions based on your lived experience”. Stature induced accidents is a false comparison unless you have witnessed short people driving erratically. Have you? I again suggest that you are misattributing your feelings here. You are not upset because I haven’t linked a study, you are upset because I have said something that violates your morality. And this is the way that you know to push back. But your reason for pushing back is on a different dimension from what you are saying and probably what you are experiencing internally as well. Morality is a tricky thing.
          • rideontime 1y ago
            There is indeed a burden of proof if you want to actually convince anybody of the claims you're making.