ninjette.org - View Single Post

beren · September 13th, 2012, 09:48 AM

Let me take a stab at it.

The question as asked- "do loud pipes save lives" should be interpreted as asking a general, not specific question. In other words, it is not asking "is it theoretically possible to concoct and out of the ordinary scenario where loud pipes are a contributing factor to avoiding an accident." It asking whether or not, as a general rule, loud pipes are likely to significantly increase safety. The answer is clearly no.

Human beings tend to think in terms of anecdotes and individual experiences and tend to weigh that one example they witnessed higher than actual data. We tend to extrapolate inappropriately from a single example. This is not an insult, it is a research-established fact about how *all* human brains work.

Research shows that we tend to view every experience in a biased manner and tend to only notice facts that support our opinion. This is called confirmation bias

Research also shows that we tend to extrapolate answers by cherry picking evidence. This is known as the fallacy of incomplete evidence and while it can be done on purpose, it is often an unintentional and accidental thing.

People posting about a specific incident that they feel proves that loud pipes helped are missing the point entirely. Even if I agree that it helped in that one example, that does not affect the larger question. Even many many examples do not. "The plural of anecdote is not data."

Let me give you a real life example. My grandmother once fell asleep while driving. She went off the road and flipped the truck. She was not wearing a seat belt, and had her window down. Her life was saved by these facts as she was flung to safety out the open window. In this limited instance, *not* wearing a seat belt saved her life, or least saved her from significant injury. If I were to use this as an example to argue that seat belts *cost* lives, I would be making a very poor argument indeed. In general, seat belts do more good than harm, even if I am aware of a scenario to the opposite.

The argument that "if it saves on life, ever, it is worth it" is fallacious because it applies equally well many other things. Weaving wildly back and forth in your lave might increase your visibility. Standing as you ride, popping a wheelie, etc might increase your visibility and could, in theory, save your life. But these are not safety maneuvers.

The argument that "if it saves on life, ever, it is worth it" is also fallacious because those making it are unwilling to argue in the reverse. Many more lives could be saved by never riding, or never going on the highway, etc. If one life made it worth it, many many more lives would make giving up biking worth it.

Anyone who buys loud pipes because they think it will save their life, or even increase their safety, is either deluded or lying. This is an issue of fact. For the same money there are far more effective safety measures. If you truly cared about safety primarily, you would spend your money elsewhere.

If you buy loud pipes because you like the sound, want more power, like the look, etc, then that is a personal taste issue, and while I may not share your opinion, it is not wrong, merely different. More power to you.

September 13th, 2012, 09:48 AM	#287
beren ninjette.org member Name: John Location: dallas Join Date: Aug 2012 Motorcycle(s): 2007 Ninja 250 Posts: 181	Let me take a stab at it. The question as asked- "do loud pipes save lives" should be interpreted as asking a general, not specific question. In other words, it is not asking "is it theoretically possible to concoct and out of the ordinary scenario where loud pipes are a contributing factor to avoiding an accident." It asking whether or not, as a general rule, loud pipes are likely to significantly increase safety. The answer is clearly no. Human beings tend to think in terms of anecdotes and individual experiences and tend to weigh that one example they witnessed higher than actual data. We tend to extrapolate inappropriately from a single example. This is not an insult, it is a research-established fact about how all human brains work. Research shows that we tend to view every experience in a biased manner and tend to only notice facts that support our opinion. This is called confirmation bias Research also shows that we tend to extrapolate answers by cherry picking evidence. This is known as the fallacy of incomplete evidence and while it can be done on purpose, it is often an unintentional and accidental thing. People posting about a specific incident that they feel proves that loud pipes helped are missing the point entirely. Even if I agree that it helped in that one example, that does not affect the larger question. Even many many examples do not. "The plural of anecdote is not data." Let me give you a real life example. My grandmother once fell asleep while driving. She went off the road and flipped the truck. She was not wearing a seat belt, and had her window down. Her life was saved by these facts as she was flung to safety out the open window. In this limited instance, not wearing a seat belt saved her life, or least saved her from significant injury. If I were to use this as an example to argue that seat belts cost lives, I would be making a very poor argument indeed. In general, seat belts do more good than harm, even if I am aware of a scenario to the opposite. The argument that "if it saves on life, ever, it is worth it" is fallacious because it applies equally well many other things. Weaving wildly back and forth in your lave might increase your visibility. Standing as you ride, popping a wheelie, etc might increase your visibility and could, in theory, save your life. But these are not safety maneuvers. The argument that "if it saves on life, ever, it is worth it" is also fallacious because those making it are unwilling to argue in the reverse. Many more lives could be saved by never riding, or never going on the highway, etc. If one life made it worth it, many many more lives would make giving up biking worth it. Anyone who buys loud pipes because they think it will save their life, or even increase their safety, is either deluded or lying. This is an issue of fact. For the same money there are far more effective safety measures. If you truly cared about safety primarily, you would spend your money elsewhere. If you buy loud pipes because you like the sound, want more power, like the look, etc, then that is a personal taste issue, and while I may not share your opinion, it is not wrong, merely different. More power to you. __________________________________________________ Shhhhh, don't tell Jiggles I am using the [ you ] tag.