I confess to having a more jaundiced view of the value of anecdotes. When used to populate a dog and pony show, I'm not a fan. I would not mind if the State of the Union went back to being a letter. The Speaker couldn't tear it up without making sure a coly was kept, it would have to be rebutted formally. On the other hand, in random statistics, every anecdote is a data point (my degree is in physics, hence the digression). When commentary is purported to be fact, sometimes the only evidence available is anecdotal. Yet, find more anecdotes than you would expect based on the commentary, and they tend to indicate that the commentary isn't necessarily reliable. I wouldn't use seat belts for a long time, because my brother was involved in a collision which crushed one side of the car completely flat roof to floorboard, and would likely have caused his death had he not been thrown across the passenger compartment. Then I learned just how much of a "freak" (i.e., anomalous) accident that was, and I wear them whether or not there are police watching or belt alarms. As humans, we go with what we have. One of my daughters constantly hears negative things about the President, and does not want to know about even-handed judgment of the news. I have tried to tell her that opinion purported to be opinion is honest, but opinion asserted to be fact is an effort to deceive, in order to explain to her that liking or not liking Trump is not an indicator of one's honesty. Finally, after I explained the Joe Biden "re-elect" video clip, she finally said "I appreciate that." Maybe I am in the road to getting her to read your columns. (in the longer version of the re-elect Trump clip, Biden seemed to be trying to say that wanting to re-elect Trump is the Democrats' goal . . . if they keep on with business as usual. I explained that he still stumbled, but that it isn't necessary for people to assign more senility than is warranted)
So here’s a sentence of yours that I had to read three times “If you get this virus, you more likely than not are not going to die, but you will be miserable and out of work...etc.” The point is important “you most likely will not die from Coronavirus but you may be very sick.” But you buried It in double negatives that could easily be misinterpreted. Might add to the confusion. Fewer words with greater precision and impact are needed these days! Just sayin😘
I confess to having a more jaundiced view of the value of anecdotes. When used to populate a dog and pony show, I'm not a fan. I would not mind if the State of the Union went back to being a letter. The Speaker couldn't tear it up without making sure a coly was kept, it would have to be rebutted formally. On the other hand, in random statistics, every anecdote is a data point (my degree is in physics, hence the digression). When commentary is purported to be fact, sometimes the only evidence available is anecdotal. Yet, find more anecdotes than you would expect based on the commentary, and they tend to indicate that the commentary isn't necessarily reliable. I wouldn't use seat belts for a long time, because my brother was involved in a collision which crushed one side of the car completely flat roof to floorboard, and would likely have caused his death had he not been thrown across the passenger compartment. Then I learned just how much of a "freak" (i.e., anomalous) accident that was, and I wear them whether or not there are police watching or belt alarms. As humans, we go with what we have. One of my daughters constantly hears negative things about the President, and does not want to know about even-handed judgment of the news. I have tried to tell her that opinion purported to be opinion is honest, but opinion asserted to be fact is an effort to deceive, in order to explain to her that liking or not liking Trump is not an indicator of one's honesty. Finally, after I explained the Joe Biden "re-elect" video clip, she finally said "I appreciate that." Maybe I am in the road to getting her to read your columns. (in the longer version of the re-elect Trump clip, Biden seemed to be trying to say that wanting to re-elect Trump is the Democrats' goal . . . if they keep on with business as usual. I explained that he still stumbled, but that it isn't necessary for people to assign more senility than is warranted)
So here’s a sentence of yours that I had to read three times “If you get this virus, you more likely than not are not going to die, but you will be miserable and out of work...etc.” The point is important “you most likely will not die from Coronavirus but you may be very sick.” But you buried It in double negatives that could easily be misinterpreted. Might add to the confusion. Fewer words with greater precision and impact are needed these days! Just sayin😘
I’m a recovering lawyer. I apologize.
🤣🤣🤣