I’m not sure the driver’s subjective sense of condidence is in mind when in engineering or testing except as an adjunct or incidental, but I do know they test and engineer the ‘thunk’ of door closings for a satisfactory and subjective feel of firmness. 
They definitely do that…
They also do handling tests to see how the car handles and every manufacturer has a signature behaviour they target for. This target is based on what kind of experience manufacturer thinks are desired by his target customer. A Porsche doesn’t behave a particular way by accident.
Edit: The sound the engine makes, Boise from the tyre… a lot of things are engineered for the customers delight.
1 Like
No argument. I put an Abarth muffler on my MGB a few years back. 
(‘A few’ would be in the neighborhood of 50.)
1 Like
How do you calculate the the resistance in a circuit? What do you think causes electrical resistance?
As far as I can tell, subjective judgments are the output of the physical brain.
Are unaccountable but meaningful sequences of ‘natural’ and ‘coincidental’ occurrences merely subjective? I would submit that they are more than that.
There is a cognitive bias at the heart of it. It would appear that only positive outcomes are remembered while neutral or bad outcomes are forgotten. Everyone will talk about the miraculous rescue of a young child, but they don’t seem talk about all of the times a child died without being rescued.
For the unbeliever as well. We all accept or reject interpretations according to the paradigms of our own worldviews.
I have the book on Kindle, but it’s been over eight years since I read it, so I don’t remember how closely grouped the sequence of ‘co-instances’ are in Stearn’s account in The Hole in Our Gospel is. I would like to just copy and paste it, but it would most likely take more time than I can give it just now to consolidate it for posting here. I would like to think that you would be able to see that they are objectively linked enough as to be undeniable.
There are people who are killed by closely grouped sequences of “co-instances” as well. It would seem that we are dealing with a bell curve with people focusing on just one tiny part of the overall curve.
Your cognitive bias is showing.
How so? I accept people who are extremely lucky, have very mundane things happen to them, and people who are extremely unlucky. I look at the entire data set. You seem to be focusing on just one tiny portion of all the data.
Because you use the word ‘luck’. ‘Luck’ and ‘coincidence’ are not in my working vocabulary, because of my cognitive bias. 
You are claiming omniscience.
Let’s take this incident.
Mike Edwards was a cellist and one of the founding members of the Electric Light Orchestra. He died when a large bail of hay rolled down a hillside and struck his car. The chances of him being at that very spot when the hay bail rolled across the road are astronomical.
You are saying that this had nothing to do with luck, so how do you explain this?
So says the person who claims knowledge of God acting in certain situations.
His time was up.
No, I am claiming that the events are consistent the testimony from the Omniscient One and from the lives of innumerably many, including mine.
What does that mean? God took him out?
A hay bale rolling down a hill and killing someone is consistent with this testimony?
Or God let him ‘be taken out’.
The sequence of events that Steve Saint relates, maybe in his book, Walking His Trail (subtitled Signs of God Along the Way), or maybe when I heard him in person, led him to conclude that “God killed my father.”
His father was killed along with Jim Elliot by an Amazon tribe in the 1950’s.
“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.” Jim Elliot
It is not inconsistent with the book of Job.
A movie, and not a dull one, was made of the story:
(Also a book: End of the Spear (book) - Wikipedia)
So he was just unlucky, and God did nothing to change his luck?
1 Like
You are using terms that are foreign to my worldview. When I die, it will not be because I am unlucky.