I'll give you the boring scientific answer. The more data, the better, at least in this case. It also depends on your definition of "better."
What about drivers who get hit by other drivers, where do they fit? Could they have had poor habits which led to getting hit and still not be at fault; sure.
Is biological sex the most important factor? Is that really the wrong question? What about age, years driving, driver training, first generation driver (Amish I guess,) forigen driver in another country, never seen a roundabout or x intersection before.... Etc, what about a male that's taken estrogen since puberty or vice versa, socioeconomic background, cheap 500$ farm truck vs 100,000 Maserati..... Etc... Etc... Etc... AD Nauseum.
I personally have known some women that put a man's aggression, and integrity to shame. But I was raised in a family of fire breathing red heads, and all my GFs were either goths or punks. But none of that matters when looking for an objective answer.
Page 758 of 1098
Cheyenne Pilot. Fighting a cold or flu or something , I'll get back to you on that one. May have to call in for a recovery if this gets worse.
I played those games with my DM as well. I had the night crew adjust mine.
As for the Denver terminal, I did stop in to get a secondary air leak fixed, they found the offending hose fitting and replaced it 15 minutes after pulling into the quick lane. Granted I sat there about an hour.
Well, the only games I play with my DM are the fun kind.
We have a good relationship, unlike some of the stories I have read about the monster DM's.
And after over 5 years with the same person, that is how it should be.
I have been very lucky and well treated here at Swift, which is why I an still here.
I have always had good DM's (only 2 since going solo, if I don't count the others in the pod), which makes a HUGE difference in anyone's experience with this company.
The other main DM I am involved with is equal. He will do what is necessary to keep me happy.
There is one new DM in the pod that I conflict with a little more, sometimes.
But he will come around with some experience, I'm sure.
I live 19 miles from Inver Grove, but I keep my home terminal at Otay Mesa for a reason.
For instance. A bunch of drivers see someone crash into a ravine. One driver says he seemed to have blown a steer tire. One driver says he was on his phone. The police say he hit the guardrrail because he was on his phone and that's when the steer tire blew. The coroner says he had a heartattack wasn't thinking correctly, panicked, dialed 911, blacked out while on the phone with dispatch then drifted into the guardrrail. God says he shouldn't have ate so many chilli dogs. A philosopher ponders "how God is evil because he let this man kill himself with chillidogs." Another philosopher ponders "God gave him a good life." An anthropologist ponders "why the socioeconomically disadvantaged have poor health habits."
I had a point when I started that, then I lost it. I'm going to bed.
We don't even know if time is a mathematical construct or a physical property or reality. What we do know, is that we measure things with time. And that gives us reproduceable results for further inquiry for a wide range of things. And based on this subjective measurement, (don't get me into relativity,) we seem to find objective results.
Bed now, debate the philosophy amongst yourselves.
Night, night. Sleep well and sweet dreams.
And after that you might consider that what you call objective is simply a subjective view with conditions, always.
Do you really think that even God has an objective perspective outside of Himself (or Herself or itself)?
I say, Nay Nay!.
No natter the religion or belief, there is no description or portrayal of God that would lead to the conclusion that God is impartial.
Or democratic, fair or otherwise objective.
It is, and always has been, about what that particular 'God' wishes to accomplish.
I didn't bring God into this discussion... you did. So let's go with it.
It could be fun. I know it is for me.
We could begin with God's goodness or evilness when it concerns matters of our suffering.
Personally, I don't think God cares too much about that because God has bigger things to think about.
Like, how does God 'evolve' beyond what God already is, has been and will be in God's own limited way.
Because God is a limited being, just like us.
I know, I know... God is everything and limitless.
But 'everything' is a limit if you can't get beyond that.
It would be a static existence... nothing more to be added or disseminated.
It would be the universe in a cyclical cycle.
The Big Bang, then expanding and contracting into the Big Crunch in a never ending cycle.
It would serve no useful purpose in the end.
But we currently don't see that in our universe.
We see an expanding universe, one in which the expansion is accelerating.
Give it long enough in that condition and the very atoms will fly apart and disintegrate.
That is foretold in the Bible, when everything dissolves, by the way.
We are individual creatures, made in Gods image.
Everything we do is in subjective terms, even if we try to paint some objectiveness on the surface.
Just as it is with God.
There is ALWAYS an underlying motive that makes true objectivity a moot point.Last edited: Sep 27, 2016
Sorry, didn't mean to stop all discussions. But it was fun.
I'm at home in Burnsville, MN. It's a couple days later than my request, but no big deal.
It is nice to have a real kitchen. Tonight I am making up a batch of chicken fried rice, and Friday I'll be doing a big turkey dinner. Not so big turkey, only 12 pounds. It was the largest the store had, but it'll do.
But now I have nothing interesting to respond with, because I agree with that assessment.
True objectivity has always been an unobtainable phantasam.
Objectivity was only ever a tool, and a very sloppy one. Even when an objective result is obtained, then comes the subjective interpretation. And we can even find what we wish by asking a different question, and change the meaning of the result with the same data.
X might always =X and X+Y may always equal Z. But then someone tries to explain it.
Throw in another condition. Let's call it condition Omega (seems fitting.) Then X=\=X. Hmmmmm guess that context thing matters.
It's so boring when I agree. (Oh there we go again, more subjectivity.)
Have fun while home. The kitchen is one of my favourite things about hometime. Plenty of time to create something tasty. And I always come home with new ideas to try.
Page 758 of 1098