I decided to move some discussion from this post up to the top level here. Specifically, Watoosh wrote: "Well, if violence is defined as initiation of force (which, of course, presupposes certain property rights), then I think Rockwell is correct..." Well, if we define cats as elephants, then many people keep elephants in their house. More seriously, firstly, violence is not usually defined that way. It's defined as, you know, violence, so that, say, someone may respond violently or non-violently to someone who aggresses against them. Otherwise, it would make no sense to say, for instance, "He punched me, but I did not stoop to violence in response." And, secondly, the libertarian usage of "initiation of force" is very offbeat. If I wander onto someone's meadow, most people would not say I had "initiated force" -- I mean, sure, I used "force" against the earth to push off walking, but that's not force directed against...
Every time someone says "90% of drivers believe they are above average at driving!", I think ... well, that means between 33% and 44% of the people who believe that are right! Perhaps more than half of drivers are able to accurately assess whether they are above average.
ReplyDeleteWell, I think your analysis is right, but if they are thinking of the mean, and 10% of drivers are REALLY terrible, 90% of drivers could be right!
Delete(I just note that's possible: I think you are correct, and most people overrate their driving skill.)