often times its not so simple as 99 to 1. People are prone to taking a 60-40 ratio and exaggerating it to 99-1 just to be able to stop thinking because it becomes "functionally true".

Similarly, people are often too dumb comprehend a third value or a subset. For example, if 99% of X are also Y, they automatically assume 99% of Y are therefore also X, when in reality X only makes up 5% of Y, and the 95% of Y that are not X are instead Z.

This is why I don't subscribe to collectivist solutions. Outcomes are more accurately predicted when the work is done to evaluate people on an individual basis.

often times its not so simple as 99 to 1. People are prone to taking a 60-40 ratio and exaggerating it to 99-1 just to be able to stop thinking because it becomes "functionally true".

Similarly, people are often too dumb comprehend a third value. For example, if 99% of X are also Y, they automatically assume 99% of Y are therefore also X, when in reality X only makes up 5% of Y, and the 95% of Y that are not X are instead Z.

This is why I don't subscribe to collectivist solutions. Outcomes are more accurately predicted when the work is done to evaluate people on an individual basis.