Type I and Type II Errors

In occupation L, both a Type I error (a false negative), where a wrongdoing exists but is judged as nonexistent, and a Type II error (a false positive), where no wrongdoing exists but it is judged as real, are equally condemned.
Both errors directly undermine the legitimacy of the entire system, so both fall under public scrutiny.

In occupation D, however, the asymmetry is stark.
A false negative—failing to detect an actual illness—is harshly condemned.
But a false positive—diagnosing a disease that does not exist and prescribing additional treatment—receives far more lenient judgment.

Structurally, the reason is obvious:
Type II errors in occupation D generate economic benefit for the practitioner, while the patient, trapped in a state of informational asymmetry, has no real ability to evaluate the appropriateness of such recommendations.

This can be an example of how the modern “cult of freedom” often produces nothing more than a misunderstanding of structure—
and ultimately, the complete shutdown of thinking.