Reckless Risk-taking

  • Status

    State
    Next Steps
    Case Date
    Jurors Accepted
    Juror Verdicts Finalized

    The details, verdicts, and comments within this case record come from its participants. The Court's role is solely to facilitate the case process.

    Copyright © 2022-2023 Bright Plaza, Inc., All Rights Reserved. No one may publish a case, or any part of it, without a clear reference to the link with the case number as in https://www.truthcourt.net/case/<case-id-number>

  • Details

    Name
    Category
    URL
    Markup
    Lie Truth

     
    Accusation
  • Verdicts

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a classic logical fallacy known as the False Dichotomy.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a classic logical fallacy known as the False Dichotomy.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a classic logical fallacy known as the False Dichotomy.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    All situations/activities involve some degree of assessed risk (in the sense of probability of sorrow, harm, death). That assessment is of course more or less reliable, given our limited knowledge and inevitable uncertainty People who might roughly agree on the riskiness of an activity can disagree on the benefit (to them) of engaging in it, so you have two continuums at play. Since no activity on this planet can be totally safe, let's take a life in a stable, middle income country dedicated to deciphering an ancient form of writing as an example; is that necessarily a "total waste"?

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a classic logical fallacy known as the False Dichotomy.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    Ocean Gate used this rationale to mask its bad decisions.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    Ocean Gate used this rationale to mask its bad decisions.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 50 %
    Supporting Text:
    For some people, who are risk-seeking, facing danger in itself is a pleasure that makes life worth living. Given the clients all were repeatedly warned and accepted the voyage anyway, they may have been in this group.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    Ocean Gate used this rationale to mask its bad decisions.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    While risk is unavoidable, we should make attempts to mitigate it.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    While risk is unavoidable, we should make attempts to mitigate it.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    While risk is unavoidable, we should make attempts to mitigate it.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 60 %
    Supporting Text:
    As above, given the range in risk/benefit strategies and risk-seeking/avoiding propensities in the population, it leaves out a large swath of decision-makers.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    While risk is unavoidable, we should make attempts to mitigate it.

    Answer:
    The deceit is that, since risk is unavoidable, we should embrace it.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    What, me worry?

    Answer:
    The deceit is that, since risk is unavoidable, we should embrace it.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    What, me worry?

    Answer:
    The deceit is that, since risk is unavoidable, we should embrace it.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    The deceit is that the lie is manipulating.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    He is trying to attract highly risk-seeking individuals to his enterprise.

    Answer:
    The deceit is that, since risk is unavoidable, we should embrace it.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    What, me worry?

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Rush was aggressively trying to recruit customers.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Rush was aggressively trying to recruit customers.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Rush was aggressively trying to recruit customers.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    There are numerous anecdotal comments about the risks of using carbon fiber hulls for deep dive submersibles. Rush suffered from confirmation bias.

    Answer:
    Rush wanted to make potential customers feel safe.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    It's as if he's saying, "you could die in a car wreck, so why not dive to the bottom of the sea in a problematic vessel with me?"

    Answer:
    I think the guy is lying to himself and believes what he says is true even though technically a lie.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    The motivation is to convince you that the lie is factually true.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    Rush wanted not to make potential customers feel safe, but that living safely was a poor choice.
    Answer Confidence: 60 %
    Supporting Text:
    It's as if he's saying, "you could die in a car wreck, so why not dive to the bottom of the sea in a problematic vessel with me?"

    Answer:
    Rush wanted to make potential customers feel safe.
    Answer Confidence: 95 %
    Supporting Text:
    It's as if he's saying, "you could die in a car wreck, so why not dive to the bottom of the sea in a problematic vessel with me?"

    Answer: Unacceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a deadly lie.

    Answer: Unacceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a deadly lie. I agree. This is a classic situation where you need the experts to certify the device you are building if they will and it is certain they would.

    Answer: Unacceptable
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Unacceptable
    Answer Confidence: 60 %
    Supporting Text:
    Most of us live in the range between "at some extreme point, safety is just pure waste" and "at some extreme point, danger is just pure waste?. We should explore all the intermediate positions.

    Answer: Unacceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a deadly lie.

    Answer:
    This statement is logically false.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    While there is risk in life, we should still be prudent and reasonable and not rely on false equivalencies like this one.

    Answer:
    This statement is logically false.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    While there is risk in life, we should still be prudent and reasonable and not rely on false equivalencies like this one.

    Answer:
    This is factually untrue.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    While there is risk in life, we should still be prudent and reasonable and not rely on false equivalencies like this one.

    Answer:
    This statement is logically false.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    While there is risk in life, we should still be prudent and reasonable and not rely on false equivalencies like this one.

    Answer:
    This statement is logically false.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    There are always tradeoffs between safety and risk, evaluated on the basis of the potential benefits offsetting the risks. Ecotourism should not incur deadly risks. What's acceptable for explorers or researchers is not acceptable for lay persons.