= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wedrifid comments on Rationality & Criminal Law: Some Questions - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (147)
That, however, is not really an explanation, but merely a statement of what has happened. Why did one issue get a head start, and why is it being talked about in a self-reinforcing way, and the other not?
It seems clear to me that there must be something about these two behaviors that makes people react to them differently, independent of any objective evaluations of their dangerousness. But what is it? I honestly can't find a better explanation than the associations people have with each behavior, where status considerations play an important role in shaping their response.
Another significant clue is that regulations intended to curb dangers from sleep-deprivation are brought and enforced against truckers, but not against medical residents, who regularly get behind the wheel after working 30-hour shifts (and not to even mention treating patients under such sleep deprivation). Do you believe that the dramatically different treatment of these professions has nothing to do with their status?
A head start is sufficient to answer the second question. It is also at least as much as an answer as 'status'. In both cases more detail is required. I am not taking a position here myself but if I wanted to find reasons for a 'head start' I would look at behvaioral trends at the time where this issue became a problem. Were people getting drunk or depriving themselves of 30 hours of sleep more often?