boundaries of responsible behavior are less clear than they once were
We all know the type. First appearing in the spring of 2020, the COVID jerk strutted unmasked through the supermarket, exhaling clouds of risk on worried shoppers and employees, and daring low-paid workers to try to enforce the new policies. Flaunting their disdain for scientific consensus, they stepped close behind you in line, breathing on your shoulder, complaining about maximum-occupancy requirements.
The classic COVID jerk still thrives. But because highly effective vaccines have been available for a long while, and as the Omicron wave subsides, reasonable people will disagree about what now constitutes a jerk move. The boundaries of responsible behavior are less clear than they once were.
I have a theory: Jerks are people who culpably fail to appreciate the intellectual and emotional perspectives of others around them. Let me unpack this a bit.
[continued here, or email me for a copy for personal use only]
14 comments:
A surgical mask doesn't work for biological agents period, proven PRIOR politics US Army Nuclear Biological Chemical weapons school.
Shutdowns violate Opportunity Cost Economics Math Models. Economics pays for food/housing/healthcare. Poor Economy = Deaths. Universal Objective Decision Model is Cost/Benefit, opposite sloping regression lines. Anything else performs worse, lacks Empathy out of ignorance.
Philosophy is not Nuclear Biological Chemical weapons and equipment science.
Philosophy is not Economics.
You are low IQ, the ultimate covid19 Jerk.
ES = BS
Questions?
Got to go with … ‘got you’ on this one.
It is even possible in your reality that the JERK might be the one wearing the mask ?
I read this article primarily as a plea for civility more than a comment on masks.
However, I have an example that is, in my opinion, a stronger counterargument to the idea of "Adhering to rules and customs" even if you don't agree with the proposed rule.
Stores across America used to have rules that only white people can drink from certain drinking fountains. People of color could drink from a separate one. Everyone now agrees that this is dumb, serves no purpose, needlessly discriminates and is a racist rule.
But, due to the rule existing, and in the spirit of adherence to custom of the time, should everyone have obeyed and provide no one challenges to this rule because, "Hey, maybe I'm wrong, maybe this isn't a big deal?" Absolutely not.
In these instances, I find that the people that argue for civility are actually demanding passivity from their audience, as challenges to social structure and order make those in privilege uncomfortable.
In my opinion, if there is a rule/custom that you do not agree with, it is your RESPONSIBILITY as a member of society to challenge that rule (and accept the consequences of that challenge). Because without this pushback, many changes throughout American history would not have been possible.
I would much rather be mistakenly labeled a 'jerk' than be accurately labeled a bystander.
I'm a former nuke SWAT team leader US Army, lost job International SALT Treaty. Retired state economist after earning education elite military service.
Tested mAsKs personally before politics to objective military standards. A surgical mask doesn't work for biological agents period. A surgical mask won't be seen at a biological agent lab, because they don't work for that purpose with trained personnel. It is past simple logic ignorant to think a surgical mask will work for biological agents with an untrained population in the practical environment.
I'd explain why single variable focus doesn't work, but the philosopher who doesn't understand objective sciences won't understand sum of the least squares opposite sloping regression lines.
Thanks for your support -
In defence of "clueless retirees"...
...equal rights are constitutional, civil rights are political, who knew...
Is cluelessness...finding out in a lifetime that we are here now on a planet...
...with nowhere else to be anymore, but to be here...
Reasons beliefs judgements, thoughts feelings sensations...
...synapses breaths instincts, intentions convictions attitudes...
This is what we have to work with for our being here today...
...seeing-listening to each other, what will I do...
14th Amendment
Not being a COVID jerk is not considering wearing a mask to be the worst indignity ever endured by a human being.
When does Nervous Nellie morph into Passive Aggressive Pete? Last week I ate for the first time in a cafe without a mask of course and it’s legal. Why didn’t someone invent a chuted mask that you could feed yourself with an airlocking device that shut after the morsal went down? Anyway I then went on to the bookstore where masks are still required (all shops). This is nonsense and I ain’t gonna do it. Other non-compliant folk were there too, breathing promiscuously.
If it’s over, let it be over.
Eric, congratulations on your Atlantic article!!
Unfortunately, it's the ramblings of low IQ
I loved the article and I know exactly what you are talking about. I can't think of a better way to describe them. I'm surprised "jerks" showed up so quickly here. There must be a bot scanning posts for anyone who might be promoting science and civility.
Obtuse self projection.
A surgical mask doesn't work for biological agents period, proven PRIOR politics US Army Nuclear Biological Chemical weapons school.
Shutdowns violate Opportunity Cost Economics Math Models, but that's more advanced science than simple mAsK science.
You won't see a surgical mask at a biological agent lab because they don't work for that purpose with trained personnel.
It's past simple logic ignorant to think a surgical mask will work for biological agents with an untrained population in the practical environment
You are low IQ, with low IQ conclusions, and performance.
Period
Thank you.
Now that we know a surgical mask doesn't work for biological agents, we can examine the shutdowns.
The proper universal objective course model often times is Cost/Benefit, opposite sloping regression lines, to meet in the middle, Least Amount of Objective Negatives to the Population. This is also the Most Empathy Model, Least amount of objective negatives to the population. Psychology's childhood is hopelessly damaged dissociated from objective science and own rules, lacks the proper model for Most Empathy, thus lacks Empathy out of the box. Sniff Test + simple logic. Back to the current environment. Economics pays for food/housing/healthcare. Thus: Poor Economy = Deaths. The proper model is Cost/Benefit. Shutdown Costs are a Negative Slope, Benefits a Positive Slope. The Least Amount of Objective Negatives is found where these Opposite Sloping Regression Lines sum of the least squares meet, in the middle. Call it balance if you like. What the Opposite Sloping Regression Lines Model understands is: Any Single Variable Focus is Never Objective Course.
John's Hopkins did a study, conclusion was the Shutdowns saved .2% of the lives lost. That's the Benefits. However the other half of the Proper Model is the Costs. That means more lives were lost due to ignorance, and the lack of Proper Model.
The universe, like Economics, is a set of relationships that you can't maximize or escape by ignoring them. It simply doesn't work that way.
No one can beat the basic laws of economics as they are a Set of Relationships in the practical environment. Not you, not Deity, not me, a trained proven objectively tested Economist.
Jesus was said to be able to do many things. Raise the dead, strike down, raise from the dead, etc. But even he knew the poor will always be with you. This is because even Deity can't beat the basic laws of economics.
Former SWAT nuke team leader US Army
Retired State Economist.
Thanks for listening
Search YouTube "Nuclear Field Artillery" video is 2:21 minutes long.
I ran a team until lost job International SALT Treaty
Post a Comment