Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:26 pm
@Jebediah,
Jebediah;173629 wrote:
Wait, wait, where did I say "absolutely no idea"? But there is having "some idea" and having enough understanding to make a responsible decision. I mean, I have some idea of how to fly a plane, but I would not do so (and should not be legally allowed to do so at this time).

I am sure that "hot, with seering pain" does not describe putting your foot in molten steel. With a little more imagination, I can assume that the air would be hot (I have felt hot air before, and perhaps it would be like that). I have singed myself with a match, so I have some idea of being burnt. But, I cannot really know to what lengths I should go to prevent the chance of it happening.


But, the point was, I thought, that we can understand how traumatic a car crash can be. Don't you think we can?

I thought you were implying that we can't know what a car crash is like when you asked:

Quote:
Can you tell me what it is like to be in a car accident?


Was I wrong? If not, then I still stand that we can know what a car crash is like, even if we haven't been in one.
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:33 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173630 wrote:
But, the point was, I thought, that we can understand how traumatic a car crash can be. Don't you think we can?

I thought you were implying that we can't know what a car crash is like when you asked:



Was I wrong?


But, it is not about whether we know that it is a bad thing. It is about whether we truly understand how bad it is, and how worth avoiding it is. I would suggest that people who don't wear a seat belt aren't really understanding how worth it it is to avoid going face first through the windshield. Because otherwise they would wear the seat belt.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:37 pm
@Jebediah,
Jebediah;173634 wrote:
But, it is not about whether we know that it is a bad thing. It is about whether we truly understand how bad it is, and how worth avoiding it is. I would suggest that people who don't wear a seat belt aren't really understanding how worth it it is to avoid going face first through the windshield. Because otherwise they would wear the seat belt.


You even say with some viligence, "going face first through the windshield", so I know you understand the repercussions. Why do you think others don't? I think many people understand how bad it can be, especially considering many of them have loved ones that have been in car accidents and have been hurt.
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:43 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173635 wrote:
You even say with some viligence, "going face first through the windshield", so I know you understand the repercussions. Why do you think others don't?


"really". "really understanding". A blind man can say "blue is a sad color" without really understanding it.

Just because I can say the words, doesn't mean I have any idea what I'm talking about. I can say words that mean nothing at all.

And the evidence that they don't understand the repercussions is that they don't wear a seat belt, just as the evidence that the man in the bridge example hadn't understood you was that he kept walking.

We don't tell children "if you play on the train tracks you might get hit by a train" and then just leave them be. And we shouldn't be so sure that we adults aren't prone to the kind of foolishness our children are.
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:47 pm
@Jebediah,
Jebediah;173640 wrote:
"really". "really understanding". A blind man can say "blue is a sad color" without really understanding it.

Just because I can say the words, doesn't mean I have any idea what I'm talking about. I can say words that mean nothing at all.

And the evidence that they don't understand the repercussions is that they don't wear a seat belt, just as the evidence that the man in the bridge example hadn't understood you was that he kept walking.

We don't tell children "if you play on the train tracks you might get hit by a train" and then just leave them be. And we shouldn't be so sure that we adults aren't prone to the kind of foolishness our children are.


Have you been headfirst through a windshield? If not, how can you understand the repercussions enough to say that other people need to avoid it so dearly? I think it's obvious that you know how dearly it should be avoided just as other people can as well.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:48 pm
@Night Ripper,
Jebediah wrote:
"really". "really understanding". A blind man can say "blue is a sad color" without really understanding it.

Just because I can say the words, doesn't mean I have any idea what I'm talking about. I can say words that mean nothing at all.


I'm not going to write about all of this. The point is that we can understand what a car crash is like. That's it.

Quote:
And the evidence that they don't understand the repercussions is that they don't wear a seat belt


I don't think that's evidence. I don't wear a seat belt, and I am more than aware of the consequences. Sometimes it's a thrill driving at 60mph+ with the wind blowing through my hair with no seatbelt on. This is negligence, not ignorance.

Quote:
We don't tell children "if you play on the train tracks you might get hit by a train" and then just leave them be. And we shouldn't be so sure that we adults aren't prone to the kind of foolishness our children are.


Well, again, this could lead into good discussion. How do you think age should be considered with a law like the seat belt law? If people cannot know any better (whether they are young, have a mental problem, etc.), maybe it is our responsibility to make sure they abide by certain things that ensure their safety. What do you think? (And Night Ripper)
Amperage
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:52 pm
@Night Ripper,
one thing that is possible to consider is that vehicles are almost a necessity in terms of traveling around to the large cities and towns that we have built for ourselves in this day and age.

Being a necessity, unlike eating large amounts of food, climbing mountains, etc., it would seem to me that we ought to reduce the chances of fatality as possible within reason.
0 Replies
 
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:53 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;173642 wrote:
Have you been headfirst through a windshield? If not, how can you understand the repercussions enough to say that other people need to avoid it so dearly? I think it's obvious that you know how dearly it should be avoided just as other people can as well.


You don't have to fully understand something to say it...I think I just said that. Watch the news, they do it constantly.

And tell me your reason for not allowing 8 year olds to take meth.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 07:54 pm
@Night Ripper,
Jebediah wrote:
And tell me your reason for not allowing 8 year olds to take meth.


Because an 8-year old probably doesn't understand the consequences. Again, age is good to bring up. Let's relate this to the seat belt example (like I probed up top).
0 Replies
 
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:04 pm
@Jebediah,
Jebediah;173646 wrote:
And tell me your reason for not allowing 8 year olds to take meth.


The same reason why 8-year-olds don't get to decide whether or not to wear a seat belt.
0 Replies
 
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:06 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173643 wrote:
I'm not going to write about all of this. The point is that we can understand what a car crash is like. That's it.


I don't understand what your definition of "understand" is. Let's say that you read a description of an acid high, and then take acid. What word would you use to describe the knowledge gained by experiencing as opposed to just reading?

Quote:
I don't think that's evidence. I don't wear a seat belt, and I am more than aware of the consequences. Sometimes it's a thrill driving at 60mph+ with the wind blowing through my hair with no seatbelt on. This is negligence, not ignorance.
The law is pragmatic though. People can thrill seek if they want, they will get unavoidably mixed in with the ignorant sometimes. Someone who thinks "I won't get in an accident, because I'm a good driver" is ignorant of how it works. I took the wrong tack on this by talking about them not understanding how it feels to be in a car wreck (although this is true, and this is how a lot of PSA's work--by driving that home). Like when they had an EMT come to my school and talk about her experiences talking to people who had just been paralyzed by the wreck, or had their face permanently disfigured.

Quote:
Well, again, this could lead into good discussion. How do you think age should be considered with a law like the seat belt law? If people cannot know any better (whether they are young, have a mental problem, etc.), maybe it is our responsibility to make sure they abide by certain things that ensure their safety. What do you think? (And Night Ripper)
Quote:
Because an 8-year old probably doesn't understand the consequences. Again, age is good to bring up. Let's relate this to the seat belt example (like I probed up top).
Yes, this is what I was getting at. The 8 year old will be able to say that it is bad to take meth, and that if you don't wear your seat belt you will probably die painfully. But as you say, he probably doesn't understand.
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:11 pm
@Night Ripper,
Jebediah wrote:
The 8 year old will be able to say that it is bad to take meth, and that if you don't wear your seat belt you will probably die painfully. But as you say, he probably doesn't understand.


Yes, I do understand what you were getting at. But what I still don't understand is why you think that adults don't understand the consequences of not wearing a seatbelt. What is your reason for thinking this?
Amperage
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:20 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173655 wrote:
Yes, I do understand what you were getting at. But what I still don't understand is why you think that adults don't understand the consequences of not wearing a seatbelt. What is your reason for thinking this?
what more reason does he need than to show that people actually don't wear their seatbelt?
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:22 pm
@Amperage,
Amperage;173660 wrote:
what more reason does he need than to show that people actually don't wear their seatbelt?


I don't see that as evidence. You do? I know many people that consciously choose to not wear seat belts, even though they fully understand the consequences. I mean, I see that sort of risk-taking all the time. A good majority know the potential consequences of smoking, but they still smoke anyway. That they smoke doesn't show they don't know the consequences.
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:23 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173655 wrote:
Yes, I do understand what you were getting at. But what I still don't understand is why you think that adults don't understand the consequences of not wearing a seatbelt. What is your reason for thinking this?


It's like saying that people suffering (for lack of a better word) from the gambler's fallacy don't really understand probability. They feel like they are bound to win soon.

We have a cognitive bias in that we tend to ignore future events and consider only the present. We feel like we are not going to get in a car wreck. Seat belt type laws are self protecting laws.

Zetherin wrote:
I know many people that consciously choose to not wear seat belts, even though they fully understand the consequences.


I know many people who consciously chose to start smoking. But if they fully understood the health consequences beforehand, how come they all try and quit? Since they can't have gotten any more understanding (already had full).
0 Replies
 
Amperage
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:23 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173662 wrote:
I don't see that as evidence. You do? I know many people that consciously choose to not wear seat belts, even though they fully understand the consequences.
what pros vs. cons could they be weighing if they truly understand the consequences? What reason could they give for not wearing a seatbelt that would trump the reality of surviving a wreck they otherwise would not?

It is for this reason that I would conclude they don't understand the seriousness of the consequences
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:25 pm
@Night Ripper,
Amperage wrote:
what pros vs. cons could they be weighing if they truly understand the consequences?


Sometimes we are willing to put ourselves in potential harm, in order to appease a desire. It's just risk-taking. It doesn't mean we don't fully understand the consequences.

Jebediah wrote:
We feel like we are not going to get in a car wreck. Seat belt type laws are self protecting laws.


I can't speak for everyone, but I don't wear a seat belt because it's uncomfortable. So, I'm willing to put myself at great risk (like going through a windshield) in order to ensure I don't sacrifice comfort.
Amperage
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:28 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173665 wrote:
Sometimes we are willing to put ourselves in potential harm, in order to appease a desire. It's just risk-taking. It doesn't mean we don't fully understand the consequences.
so what your saying is that people don't wear their seatbelt out of some sort of thrill seeking behavior? That, to me, is not a good enough reason to make wearing a seatbelt optional. There are much more controlled, less fatal situations where people can get that fix.
0 Replies
 
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:29 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173665 wrote:
Sometimes we are willing to put ourselves in potential harm, in order to appease a desire. It's just risk-taking. It doesn't mean we don't fully understand the consequences.


Some risk taking is legitimate. But some is not, I really think. People who mountain bike, have a nasty crash, and go out again were probably waying the pros and cons appropriately for them. In other cases it is just recklessness.

It has to go pretty far before it's the gov't's job to step in though.

Zetherin wrote:
I can't speak for everyone, but I don't wear a seat belt because it's uncomfortable. So, I'm willing to put myself at great risk (like going through a windshield) in order to ensure I don't sacrifice comfort.


If you get used to it you don't even notice it. It just takes a few weeks to habituate. I notice the same thing when I start driving a new car, very uncomfortable for a few weeks, then it become comfortable.

Also, I think if you got in a car wreck, you would wear your seat belt afterwards :p
0 Replies
 
Amperage
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jun, 2010 08:30 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;173665 wrote:
I can't speak for everyone, but I don't wear a seat belt because it's uncomfortable. So, I'm willing to put myself at great risk (like going through a windshield) in order to ensure I don't sacrifice comfort.
Is your comfort worth the loss of you to your family?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Seat Belt Laws
  3. » Page 4
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/05/2020 at 11:13:40