> as a set of behaviors
I think you're thinking about "set" and "behaviors" incorrectly here. The definition wouldn't need to state "and doesn't fall asleep", because abstractions like "being attentive" and "anticipating things that might go wrong" already cover that.
It’s an illiterate example not a literal one. The point is trying to state the full set of behaviors that represent safe driving will fail.
> The definition wouldn't need to state "and doesn't fall asleep", because abstractions like "being attentive" and "anticipating things that might go wrong" already cover that.
And here you failed, “Being attentive” is a proxy for the behavior you want not inherently valuable. Information saturation also results in accidents, though this is more commonly recognized in aviation the same is true of driving.
Specificity is required not just platitudes.
Information saturation is another way of saying attention incapacity.
We don’t have NTSB reports for every car accident, so trying to draw the line on which behaviors are actually desirable is just a tautology with things that minimize accidents not some actual list. There’s many behaviors listed on NTSB reports that where assumed the be good ideas that turned out to be dangerous in practice.