Deaths when not using helmet

[david k]

Lets go back to the origins of the wheel for a moment, which would be the more likely ? Man drawing a circle in the sand and thinking that would work (science of the day). Or man rolling his rock on a couple of logs to get it from A to B (-personal experience- science ?) Its down to definitions. Of course scientists would like to claim step forwards have been down to them it adds weight to their studies now.
While on the subject of weight, science does not give a lot to faith. Yet they require us to have plenty of it when it comes to us believing their studies and reports.
mm science wants it all ways !

Morning lukesdad

I like your analogy, I'm led to believe that many things invented have been found by chance, working on one thing when through trail and error or expirience they find something else. I trust myself, I am in charge of my own destiny and therefore will not be taking the advice of people with a fruit fetish. wearing a helmet is a simple individual choice, that person can draw on what he like to make that decision, as its a simple safety choice my own experience tells me to wear one, the evidence I value tells me to wear one, my attitude does not change when i wear one so no need for concerns from others about that.

Do we really have freedom of choice when others want hard facts before allowing us the decision to wear a helmet? They question it and try to make us look stupid, why would people do that?

 

[John90]

While on the subject of weight, science does not give a lot to faith. Yet they require us to have plenty of it when it comes to us believing their studies and reports.

Mmm science wants it all ways !

Sorry, that's just wrong. Science is based on scepticism, not faith. The debate about advances coming from trial and error or science is a false dichotomy.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Sorry, that's just wrong. Science is based on scepticism, not faith. The debate about advances coming from trial and error or science is a false dichotomy.

So what is the third option?

 

[John90]

So what is the third option?

Not a third option, but the two on offer are not opposed. Sometimes trial and error (e.g. discovery of penicillin) results in progress, sometimes - and more often - progress comes from carefully controlled, gradual research. In both cases, understanding of, and improvement on, the progress made will likely come by applying the scientific method (as it did with penicillin). I suppose trial and error was more important in less sophisticated times and societies, but it is a perfectly acceptable method for scientists in the right circumstances today, and even in the more rigorous/abstract discipline of maths.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Not a third option, but the two on offer are not opposed. Sometimes trial and error (e.g. discovery of penicillin) results in progress, sometimes - and more often - progress comes from carefully controlled, gradual research. In both cases, understanding of, and improvement on, the progress made will likely come by applying the scientific method (as it did with penicillin). I suppose trial and error was more important in less sophisticated times and societies, but it is a perfectly acceptable method for scientists in the right circumstances today, and even in the more rigorous/abstract discipline of maths.

A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black-and-white thinking or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses) is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are additional options (sometimes shades of grey between the extremes). For example, "It wasn't medicine that cured Ms. X, so it must have been a miracle."

To me it seems as though another option must exist in order for the term False Dichotomy to be used.

 

[Red Light]

Lets go back to the origins of the wheel for a moment, which would be the more likely ? Man drawing a circle in the sand and thinking that would work (science of the day). Or man rolling his rock on a couple of logs to get it from A to B (-personal experience- science ?) Its down to definitions. Of course scientists would like to claim step forwards have been down to them it adds weight to their studies now.

While on the subject of weight, science does not give a lot to faith. Yet they require us to have plenty of it when it comes to us believing their studies and reports.

Mmm science wants it all ways !

Science in the Aristotelian sense is very well defined by him in Nicomachean Ethics and is about inductive and deductive reasoning, not the gathering of experience or data. Francis Bacon and others modified it with the introduction of the scientific method but even today Aristotle's definition stands good.

Now you may or may not believe in science but the one thing is does do is set out all the workings transparently so you can assess them and make your own decisions. That is were it differs from faith which is a trust, hope or belief that is not based on proof. The other thing it has is a good track record.

But it has been fun watching you and david k following fallacious reasoning to persuade yourselves that personal experience is science and science is faith. So carry on.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Science in the Aristotelian sense is very well defined by him in Nicomachean Ethics and is about inductive and deductive reasoning, not the gathering of experience or data. Francis Bacon and others modified it with the introduction of the scientific method but even today Aristotle's definition stands good.

Now you may or may not believe in science but the one thing is does do is set out all the workings transparently so you can assess them and make your own decisions. That is where it differs from faith which is a trust, hope or belief that is not based on proof. The other thing it has is a good track record.

But it has been fun watching you and david k following fallacious reasoning to persuade yourselves that personal experience is science and science is faith. So carry on.

How deep are you in your trench? You must need a step ladder to look out of it by now.

 

[Red Light]

Sometimes trial and error (e.g. discovery of penicillin) results in progress, sometimes - and more often - progress comes from carefully controlled, gradual research.

The discovery of penicillin was not a result of trial and error, it was serendipitous observation of a fortuitous accident followed by scientific investigation. Goodyear's discovery of vulcanisation of rubber is probably the best example of trial and error discovery. It was discovered by accident and then, because the accident had not been the result of a structured investigation, it took a lot of structured investigation to find out what he had actually done and be able to repeat it.

 

[Red Light]

How deep are you in your trench? You must need a step ladder to look out of it by now.

I am sure the scientific community all looks up to you and Lukesdad up there on your higher plane. I'm sure they'll award you a Nobel Prize when they finally come to comprehend the magnitude of your discovery. Meanwhile carry on with the amusement.

 

[david k]

stainless steel was also found by accident i believe. Was it therefore science or discovery, or does it even matter as long as it is discovered? The important thing ius the result not the journey.
Helmets are still my protection of choice for my head, regardless of the journey

Its amusing to see redlight and cucomberlin try to question peoples decision to wear a helmet and how they arrived at that decision more than the benefits. I look forward to your next set of links

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I am sure the scientific community all looks up to you and Lukesdad up there on your higher plane. I'm sure they'll award you a Nobel Prize when they finally come to comprehend the magnitude of your discovery. Meanwhile carry on with the amusement.

The amusement works both ways I assure you. I believe in what personal experience has shown me. If my personal experiences change then so will my beliefs. That is trial and error and also a form of faith. Science and Faith do not have to be mutually exclusive. If they were nobody with any faith could become a scientist. It seems harder for a scientist to have faith for some reason though.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

stainless steel was also found by accident i believe. Was it therefore science or discovery, or does it even matter as long as it is discovered? The important thing ius the result not the journey.
Helmets are still my protection of choice for my head, regardless of the journey

Its amusing to see redlight and cucomberlin try to question peoples decision to wear a helmet and how they arrived at that decision more than the benefits. I look forward to your next set of links

To quote Gary Moore - "No flag or uniform ever stopped a bullet from a gun." Stats are no protection against reality.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Lets go back to the origins of the wheel for a moment, which would be the more likely ? Man drawing a circle in the sand and thinking that would work (science of the day). Or man rolling his rock on a couple of logs to get it from A to B (-personal experience- science ?) Its down to definitions. Of course scientists would like to claim step forwards have been down to them it adds weight to their studies now.

While on the subject of weight, science does not give a lot to faith. Yet they require us to have plenty of it when it comes to us believing their studies and reports.

Mmm science wants it all ways !

It does seem that way doesn't it. IMHO many scientists are as entrenched in their opinions as the most fundamental religious zealots

 

[david k]

To quote Gary Moore - "No flag or uniform ever stopped a bullet from a gun." Stats are no protection against reality.

but some wish to hide behind their stats of choice when questioning somebodys sanity for wearing a helmet
i have confidence in my own decision making, i dont need continued investigation and critical anlysis to form a simple decision, it must be difficult for those who do

 

[Angelfishsolo]

but some wish to hide behind their stats of choice when questioning somebodys sanity for wearing a helmet
i have confidence in my own decision making, i dont need continued investigation and critical anlysis to form a simple decision, it must be difficult for those who do

Hence the analogy - Stats are a flag or uniform to hide behind. I know that if I analysed each and every ride I did I would come to the conclusion that I need a different bike for just about every ride. Impractical and financially and physically impossible.