But that’s only a nominal distinction, and gets into circular arguments like “A is not in B because the definition of B excludes A.” Physically, swimming and flying are basically the same thing. For the smallest insects, the air is viscous enough that their structures and motion for “flying” share more similarities with how aquatic organisms swim than how birds fly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairyfly
I think it has more to do with how human languages are necessarily human centric. WE can’t fly through the air (not when those words were being developed) but we can swim through water. So our brains categorise them as different concepts.
There’s a pervasive idea that small cars are unsafe because of the people who drive larger cars.
Unfortunately that does indeed seem to be supported by the data. So we have this arms race of everyone wanting the larger cars for their own safety at the cost of everyone else’s, especially non-drivers.
There’s no talking people out of it because it does have a safety benefit. Even if someone hates giant cars, they overwhelmingly feel they have to get one because everyone else is. It’s another way capitalism pits individuals against each other to the detriment of everyone involved. The best way to address it would be to ban oversized cars (or cars in general) so the safety threat is eliminated.