Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I find it similar to the risk of an airplane death. Both of those are deemed by 'rationalists' as irrational fears, as airplanes are by and large, safer than driving cars. However, considering the outcomes the fear is not as irrational; there are a significant chance of surviving a car accident, but almost none at all of a plane one. It also comes with a bonus of a few minutes of horrifying fall into your inevitable doom, too.

Nuclear plants can be safe, but when they fail the results are often catastrophic. People prefer to live with many small dangers rather than one giant but very unlikely one, and while it may be called out as irrational in the strictest definition of reason, it's perfectly human.



there are a significant chance of surviving a car accident, but almost none at all of a plane one.

I think this demonstrates the overarching point well because the chances of surviving an air related accident are surprisingly high.

The NTSB figures for people involved in commercial airline accidents between 1983-2000 show that 95.7% of people survived: http://boingboing.net/2012/11/05/surviving-a-plane-crash-is-... .. even narrowed down to only the "worst accidents", the overall rate was 76.6%.


Which highlights the problem with fear - when you look down the list of leading causes of death, you basically have a million terrible diseases (cancer, heart disease, alzheimer's etc.)... but once you get out of the "disease" territory, the big killer? Cars.

Probably the most avoidable, most pointless way to die... but we think nothing of driving everywhere, of putting our kids in cars (children don't get much in the way of heart disease or alzheimers, so automotive accidents are pretty close to the top for them).

So yeah, I have trouble respecting the public's perception of danger.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: