Yesterday's news

[j4]

Another of those news-article-with-comment fragments (believe it or not, I'm deleting more than I post: down to 113 once this one's been exorcised). Again, unedited except that I've made the URL into a hyperlink for convenience.

Lib Dem transport spokesman Norman Baker said: "Young drivers could face legal problems because they have had a couple of drinks the night before or used alcohol in cooking. The answer is a lower limit for all drivers."

The reference to "young drivers" make it sound as though being a "driver" is something inherent, essential, rather than merely a choice on a case-by-case basis to perform an action. In fact, in that sense, it's a bit like drinking: so why don't we say that young drinkers could face legal problems just because they have a couple of car-journeys? They're equally absurd. Neither drinking nor driving is essential or irreversible; there's nothing illogical about legislating to make them mutually exclusive choices.

The question of why it should only apply to "young" people is another matter entirely, and seems to me to be supporting the idea that drink-driving is something you can do when you're a better driver: this may indeed be true, but who decides who "counts" as a "better" driver? Older drivers, who (may) have more experience? Younger drivers, who (may) have quicker reflexes? Either way, since the majority of people believe they're above average competence as drivers, this seems like a dangerous idea to propagate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7505018.stm

The reason I never post these things at the time is that I feel I can't post them without hedging around everything a bit more, making sure that every possible argument is covered, making sure I'm not categorically stating anything that isn't 100% verifiable fact. Not being interpreted as categorically stating anything, etc. Not apparently being interpreted as, etc. Endlessly backing off, bent double with différence. The more I start to hedge, the more arguments come crawling out from under the stone, the more it all unravels, until I'm incapable of saying anything. Every thought is just a flamewar that I haven't been burned by yet: in the acorn, the tree; in the tree, the dead wood, the pyre.

Comments

[jiggery-pokery.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I fear - and consider it an informed fear worth worrying about - that every post, and every comment, I make is wrong, or a mistake, somehow. You are not alone.

There's a quote that I'm going to mangle that runs along the lines of "If ((humanity)) waited long enough to do anything so that no ((human)) could find fault with it, nothing would ever get done", and part of me feels that that has to be the spirit in going ahead and making imperfect but better-than-nothing contributions, give or take a bit of doubt over the anthropocentricity.

[j4.livejournal.com]

If ((humanity)) waited long enough to do anything so that no ((human)) could find fault with it, nothing would ever get done

Yes -- I tend to articulate that as "don't let the best be the enemy of the good" ... but in the case of LJ posts/comments it's not so much worrying about some hypothetical fault-finding or imperfections that will make me feel inadequate, it's more worrying about the actual verbal kicking I'm going to get from real people on the internet. I can live with "that post wasn't as good as it could have been" or "I didn't say that very clearly, sorry, let me try again", but flamewars upset me (and saying "please can we stop this, you're upsetting me" is always interpreted as "I know I'm wrong but I'm too proud to admit it so please kick me some more until I confess"). :-(

I'm not sure what you mean about the anthropocentricity -- I strongly suspect that humans are the only creatures daft enough to faff about worrying about stuff like this! :-}

[rmc28]

I have a whole queue of posts I've half-written in my head (and in one or two places written down) and I can't bear to post them because people will shout at me.

So, it's not just you.

[pjc50.livejournal.com]

Me too. There's plenty of half-formed ideas which feel important but are just too flammable to discuss easily on the internet. :(