So lock it down! Except for the people that don't eh. That's ok because it would be icky if they lockdown, because that would be an actual lockdown and no one wants to pay the price on that eh.

That is why the lockdown failed and will always fail: Exceptions are made because society is too weak to do it right. therefore, since it will not be done right, there is no purpose doing it at all. Unless the plan is to draw it out unreasonably, then we are on the right path for sure. — Book273

Well no the point of locking down is to minimise people getting sick and dying. That would rather be thwarted by people getting sick and dying due to there being no doctors. As I've just said in my last post on another thread -- which just goes to demonstrate the problem -- extremism is the logic of the dumb.

I see vastly different protective gear being used in china and other countries than what is being touted as required here. I would compare the gear difference as one being suitable and appropriate for an Ebola level virus (china response) versus a moderate influenza (Canada response). Clearly something is missing from the narrative as both of these responses cannot be accurate. Since this bug is here to stay, maybe an accurate narrative is in order.

People will get sick and die no matter what is done by anyone. That is what we do, we live, we get less healthy, eventually we die. Repeat until extinction. This should surprise no one over 6 years old. Quality of life is far more important than quantity of life, at least for me.

I definitely believe that something is missing from the narrative we are seeing about Covid_19. Apart from the difference in the way it was all being treated in China, the idea that it began as an accident, escaping in a Chinese laboratory is now believed to be wrong. Also, all these rumours of new variants.

I am not sure what to make of it all but I am inclined to believe that there are big political agendas behind the scenes. It could be about conflict between superpowers or it could be about agendas of the ruling elite, who own and manufacture the news. Perhaps even some of our leaders are not privy to this information and are like puppets. I would like to believe that it is just a virus that needs to be controlled but I do believe that some of the facts don't seem to add up properly.

Many of the facts don't add up. If there was some secret plan by the ruling elite to create massive change through the instrument of the virus I would find it heartening, even if I did not support the change, as at least it would demonstrate a level of foresight and leadership that I have never seen in our elected leaders. I suspect the response is a case of "We need to do something because the people expect us to! Quick, what did that other country do last week? Let's do that!" And now no one will step back and admit the initial response, and therefore everything built upon it, was a mistake. Our prime minister can't say "Oops, our bad. We shouldn't have locked anything down. Crumping the economy was a mistake and it had no impact on viral spread. Take off your masks and go back to work everyone, nothing to see here!" He will be torn apart by people who have lost theirs homes and businesses to the lockdowns. They (governments) have to carry on and sell what they started, eventually saying the Vaccine "saved us" and will allow us to go back to normal (ish) in a year or three. Even if the vaccine doesn't work, no one will admit it, it will all be "just think how much worse it would have been without it". Really hard to prove how bad something that never happened would have been.

It is all haphazard. Perhaps the problem is that the leaders are not prepared to admit to making mistakes and insistent on appearing right in public opinion Of course, if the leaders admitted they did not know what they were doing people would lose trust in them. Perhaps the missing narrative is the way in which the government and scientists are so baffled, because this is evident if you read between the lines, because the goalposts keep changing.

Do people trust their leaders? I do not believe I ever have. I have seen very little which would demonstrate competence, let alone inspire trust. My theory is that the government is terrified of admitting that they are clueless about what to do. Which is unfortunate because when I admit that I do not know what is going on with a patient, to that patient, but that I am going to work and find out, and then we will figure out how to get the best result possible, I have never had a patient get angry with me. They relax as they realize that I will not lie to them as I admit I do not have an answer, and then are understanding as we move forward with their care. Admitting ignorance is rarely a bad thing. Accepting ignorance is entirely different. We should never stop looking for an answer.

To tie this back to the topic of this thread, maybe it's important for politicians to appear right, so they have something to toot their horn about in the next election campaign. These days, media houses make no bones about whom they side with and what their agenda is and will happily endorse said politician.

It is the first time that I have come across you, so I expect you are new and I am glad to meet you. This thread is about people insisting upon being right and it is just the case that thoughts about the pandemic are intruding us everywhere, all the time. Of course, it is true that the politicians are intent upon being seen as right because they want our votes.

I read an article in Feb/March 2021 'Philosophy Now' , which is relevant to the thread, so I will make a brief mention of it for anyone who is interested. It is called, 'The Limits of Argument', by Howard Darmstadter. He explores the nature of beliefs and changes to these and suggests that we hold on to the ones which we have acquired to protect us 'from a perpetual state of agitation and indecision.' He suggests that the main reason why we may change these beliefs is on the basis of our experiences, and he says, 'People do change their central beliefs, but often only as a result of a purely personal event, such as falling in love, or the death of a relative, or of a widespread catastrophe, like war or a plague.'

I think that what he is saying is so true and goes to the core of attachment to beliefs and the emotional basis of ideas. So, when people are insisting on being right it should not be viewed as mere arrogance in most instances, but more of the way in which our views are so bound up with our interpretiation and understanding of experiences.