Five Ala players have tested positive

[Augusta_Jacket]

But honest question: Say the GTAA comes out today and says the schedule will be played as is and the fans are allowed to attended, are you going to the games this year?

I have a feeling you won't. And if you do you are using my argument for me....Personal choice.

Honest answer: I don't know yet. It depends on a lot of factors and right now there's not enough good data to make a decision.

 

[Jim Prather]

Yes. It is. It's extremely poor logic. Instead of debating the matter at hand, instead accuse people of selective moral outrage. So I will play this game.

Using the driving analogy, it's still not about personal choice. The question is why the government ALLOWS us, it's not a constitutional right, to drive cars when they know full well people will die due to accidents. The answer is that the risk has been deemed low enough to be negligible. It's why we don't shut down every year for seasonal flu. As with a battlefield commander, the costs have been measured and determined to be within acceptable parameters. Had COVID-19 been similar to flu in its contagiousness and morbidity, then we wouldn't have shut down.

Now, I was responding to a poster who has continually put forward false numbers and bad math to prove his point, and when that fails, throws logical fallacies accusing people of selective moral outrage.

We have always had personal choice to stay off roads and stay away from others who are sick. What we have NOT always had was a government forcing us to do so.

Bad logic.

I appreciate the reply and I would like to continue the debate. Unfortunately, I don't really follow the point you are making. If you would be willing to re-state your argument, I would enjoy the opportunity to reply.

 

[WreckinGT]

Very good, we have made progress! We agree that the analogy is applicable if imperfect. So now let me extend the rest of your argument. It is an acceptable risk to drive a car because if you get into a deadly accident you might only kill yourself and perhaps 1-2 others. However it is not acceptable for a larger number of people to be at risk (via virus, etc.).
At the end of the day, you have made a risk assessment and deemed driving a car to be "safe enough". Likewise, someone else might view that as too much risk and choose never to drive.
The question then becomes does that give that person the right to tell you that you could never drive a car again because THEY didn't feel safe about driving?

If my bad driving is contagious and could lead to thousands of others driving badly which would lead to thousands of unnecessary deaths then yes, someone should tell me to not drive. That is obviously ridiculous because comparing driving to a health pandemic makes no sense at all. Yes, there are many risks in life. No they are not all equal and do not all call for the same response.

 

[Jim Prather]

If my bad driving is contagious and could lead to thousands of others driving badly which would lead to thousands of unnecessary deaths then yes, someone should tell me to not drive. That is obviously ridiculous because comparing driving to a health pandemic makes no sense at all. Yes, there are many risks in life. No they are not all equal and do not all call for the same response.

So we agree in principle that different levels of risk merit different responses - now we simply need to determine what level of risk merits what response.
If I were to tell you that there was a 1 in 3 chance you would get into an accident with a school bus today and a busload of children were going to die. Would that be sufficient cause to ban you from driving for the day?
What if I told you that it is a 1 in 3 chance in your lifetime? Would that be sufficient cause to ban you from driving for a lifetime?
What if I told you it was a 1 in 30 chance of getting into an accident with a school bus in your lifetime? Would that be sufficient cause to ban you from driving for a lifetime?
And here is the real kicker... Why am I the one deciding whether or not you should be allowed to drive at all?

 

[WreckinGT]

So we agree in principle that different levels of risk merit different responses - now we simply need to determine what level of risk merits what response.
If I were to tell you that there was a 1 in 3 chance you would get into an accident with a school bus today and a busload of children were going to die. Would that be sufficient cause to ban you from driving for the day?
What if I told you that it is a 1 in 3 chance in your lifetime? Would that be sufficient cause to ban you from driving for a lifetime?
What if I told you it was a 1 in 30 chance of getting into an accident with a school bus in your lifetime? Would that be sufficient cause to ban you from driving for a lifetime?
And here is the real kicker... Why am I the one deciding whether or not you should be allowed to drive at all?

If everyone had a 1 in 3 chance to kill a busload of children every time they drove a car then do you really think driving would be legal? Im not sure what you are promoting here. Do you want to get rid of all laws and policies, and move to pure chaos to promote your vision of true freedom? I don't think I want to live in that world but at least the suggestion is amusing.

 

[Jim Prather]

If everyone had a 1 in 3 chance to kill a busload of children every time they drove a car then do you really think driving would be legal? Im not sure what you are promoting here. Do you want to get rid of all laws and policies, and move to pure chaos to promote your vision of true freedom? I don't think I want to live in that world but at least the suggestion is amusing.

I'm not promoting anything... But back to the specific discussion at hand... I did not claim everyone had a 1 in 3 chance. I posed the question that if you in particular had a 1 in 3 chance today, in your lifetime, or if you had a 1 in 30 chance in your lifetime should I (in some hypothetical role as arbiter of risk) have have the ability to ban you from driving?

 

[WreckinGT]

I'm not promoting anything... But back to the specific discussion at hand... I did not claim everyone had a 1 in 3 chance. I posed the question that if you in particular had a 1 in 3 chance today, in your lifetime, or if you had a 1 in 30 chance in your lifetime should I (in some hypothetical role as arbiter of risk) have have the ability to ban you from driving?

Yes, absolutely. If you somehow know for sure that I pose that big of a risk with that much accuracy then yes, you should ban me from driving or require me to do something to substantially improve those odds if possible. You actually won't have to worry about it because there is no chance that I would even consider driving knowing I pose that kind of risk.

 

[Jim Prather]

Yes, absolutely. If you somehow know for sure that I pose that big of a risk with that much accuracy then yes, you should ban me from driving or require me to do something to substantially improve those odds if possible. You actually won't have to worry about it because there is no chance that I would even consider driving knowing I pose that kind of risk.

And I am in no way implying that you would. It is merely a hypothetical discussion. So what if the odds were 1 in 30,000 or 1 in 300,000 that at some point in your life you would get into that accident? Would you still agree that I have have the ability to ban you from driving?

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I appreciate the reply and I would like to continue the debate. Unfortunately, I don't really follow the point you are making. If you would be willing to re-state your argument, I would enjoy the opportunity to reply.

It's because you completely missed the point at the beginning. The poster used a logical fallacy and I stated it was bad logic, which it is. We can continue with the false equivalency of comparing driving deaths to communicable diseases, but it's still bad logic. One can choose not to drive, but one might not be able to choose not to interact with an asymptomatic carrier. It's apples and oranges...

 

[CuseJacket]

As this thread has veered off and is no longer materially different than the original Coronavirus thread in the Lounge, I'm going to lock this one and ask that folks redirect the conversation to the other thread. https://gtswarm.com/threads/coronavirus-thread.21189