57aa2e2d   
   XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android   
   From: pmcook@gte.net   
      
   On Wed, 09 Dec 2015 23:14:38 -0500, (PeteCresswell) wrote:   
      
   > Maybe this is coming down to two versions of "Facts":   
   >   
   > - "Official" facts - like accident statistics   
   >   
   > - Individual drivers' anecdotal data and impressions   
      
   Hi Pete,   
   Like you, I think there are multiple versions of facts:   
      
   1. Almost everyone (including me) intuits that the use of   
      cellphones while driving is an additional distraction;   
      and we therefore intuit that more accidents *should*   
      occur over time due to that apparent additional distraction.   
      
   2. Every single person here has seen those headline-grabbing   
      reports of so-called 'studies' which *prove* [sic] that   
      cellphone use is as distracting as (name your most horrid   
      headline-grabbing activity akin to drunk driving).   
      
   3. Not one of us (including you and me) can actually *find*   
      those accidents in the well-established very reliable   
      accident-rate reports of the US Census Bureau.   
      
   4. Yet, everyone knows there are many laws in many states   
      against the use of cellphones while driving (which bolsters   
      their intuition that it must be dangerous of there is a   
      law against it, right?).   
      
   5. Some people can't be bothered by the fact shown in item   
      #3 above. For them, the fact of #1 and #2 and #4 is   
      good enough for them. It doesn't matter to them that   
      nobody can actually *find* the missing accidents in   
      the reliable data (which was never compiled to prove   
      something, which #2 almost always was).   
      
   6. Lastly, everyone (including you and me) has seen a driver   
      acting irresponsibly on the road. It turns out that driving   
      is inherently easy, so, while you and I hang out with people   
      who have far above the normal 3-digit IQ, when we're driving,   
      we're enmeshed with people with 2-digit IQs on the road.   
      
      Those people who are Myers-Briggs strong perceptive (P),   
      like I am, let it go without bother (e.g., you'll never   
      see a bumper sticker on "my" car!). However, those very   
      strong judgmental (J) types can't stand when someone else   
      is either breaking the law, or they are driving erratically   
      or that they are doing something (eating, drinking, talking)   
      that the J type wouldn't do while driving.   
      
   7. Statistics is lost on some people. For example, if a black   
      person mugs a white person in their town, some people tend   
      to believe that all black people mug white people.   
      
      If a Muslim blows up a child-care center, these highly   
      intuitive highly judgmental people tend to think that all   
      Muslims are terrorists.   
      
      Yes, it's a fact that "a" black person mugged "a" white   
      person, or a Muslim terrorized the town; but these people   
      let local facts obscure the big picture.   
      
      Clearly that is what is happening in this case.   
      
      There isn't a person alive who doesn't know of "a" case   
      where "a" driver using a cellphone was in an accident.   
      
   The problem is that, overall, these accidents don't exist   
   in any numbers sufficient enough to show up in reliable   
   statistics compiled by the US Census Bureau over the past   
   fifty years.   
      
   That's a fact that nobody here has yet disproved.   
   And it takes only one negative fact, to disprove them all.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)