The mind boggles that you understand this but want to encourage people to do the irrational thing instead of put the statistics in context. I get not trying to persuade people the US is safe to travel to (from the pov of gun violence) but why would you try to persuade them that it isn’t???
I am not doing shit. The UK government and other European nations do this without me (warn travelers about the US). I was just pointing it out and the possible rationales even if statistically it is a non-issue.
Preference and perception drive most people. Let’s just examine the fact that lots of people refuse to fly even though it is safer than driving. Are they wrong from a statistical analysis, sure. Are you going to convince them with stats, probably not.
Trying to justify perception and stating it exists are two different things. I can speak to both. It definitely exists and the reason it exists is due to verifiable information.
Your statistical analysis cannot disprove perception because people are more likely to accept anecdotal evidence. That is just human nature.
You can definitely fight back with anecdotal information yourself (ie: My relatives traveled to the US and has a splendid time with no problems) but trying to sway people with statistics is a non-starter for a lot of people.
You are telling me you can absolutely alter people’s belief with statistics!? Perhaps a few people who believe in this type of analysis.
All your comments give me the Impression I am talking to a brick wall. Maybe it is a ESL thing or perhaps your profound lack of reading comprehension. Any insight?
All your comments give me the Impression I am talking to a brick wall. Maybe it is a ESL thing or perhaps your profound lack of reading comprehension. Any insight?
My insight is that you’re a cunt.
If you want to not talk to a brick wall try engaging properly, defending your position (or changing it) and not resorting to insults. Not on me though, I’m outta here.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
The mind boggles that you understand this but want to encourage people to do the irrational thing instead of put the statistics in context. I get not trying to persuade people the US is safe to travel to (from the pov of gun violence) but why would you try to persuade them that it isn’t???
I am not doing shit. The UK government and other European nations do this without me (warn travelers about the US). I was just pointing it out and the possible rationales even if statistically it is a non-issue.
Preference and perception drive most people. Let’s just examine the fact that lots of people refuse to fly even though it is safer than driving. Are they wrong from a statistical analysis, sure. Are you going to convince them with stats, probably not.
You’re trying to justify the perception. If you’re not trying to, you’re doing it by accident, so maybe that’s something you can avoid.
Dude, you have no place to be accusing people of motivated and emotional reasoning, if that’s where this is going.
Trying to justify perception and stating it exists are two different things. I can speak to both. It definitely exists and the reason it exists is due to verifiable information.
Your statistical analysis cannot disprove perception because people are more likely to accept anecdotal evidence. That is just human nature.
You can definitely fight back with anecdotal information yourself (ie: My relatives traveled to the US and has a splendid time with no problems) but trying to sway people with statistics is a non-starter for a lot of people.
https://vger.to/lemmy.world/comment/22581151
This comment gives the impression of trying to justify it.
You absolutely can alter perception with evidence. It depends on your audience. Using statistics in a misleading way has the opposite effect.
You are telling me you can absolutely alter people’s belief with statistics!? Perhaps a few people who believe in this type of analysis.
All your comments give me the Impression I am talking to a brick wall. Maybe it is a ESL thing or perhaps your profound lack of reading comprehension. Any insight?
My insight is that you’re a cunt.
If you want to not talk to a brick wall try engaging properly, defending your position (or changing it) and not resorting to insults. Not on me though, I’m outta here.
Oh yes a brick wall that acts like an asshole. I was guessing this is where it was heading because you have been a shithead this whole time.
Respectfully gent bent.