I'm surprised at the amount of engineers on this site
You should check out social media. Never knew there were so many deep sea submersible experts in the world.
I'm surprised at the amount of engineers on this site
I'm surprised at the amount of engineers on this site
Listen, on this site we have expert engineers, epidemiologists, virologists, political scientists, football analysts, medical doctors, sports scientists, cosmologists and philosophers.
One would be genuine grief, the other a moment of rejoicingYoude grieve for steve hocking as youde grieve for trent cotchin?
Youde grieve for steve hocking as youde grieve for trent cotchin?
I dispute the bit about football analysts (other than crater of course)Listen, on this site we have expert engineers, epidemiologists, virologists, political scientists, football analysts, medical doctors, sports scientists, cosmologists and philosophers.
And I'm really only talking about my own qualifications here
In all the examples you have provided there is a narrative.That equality of all human life is a glib fallacy
Who's come pissin and moanin to you Abe?Reckon I must be one of them totally callous old bastards. Got bugger all sympathy for the people who go out n do the mountain climbing, mini sub diving, race driving, base jumping type of extreme adventure stuff, just coz they love the thrill and excitement. Good luck to them pushing the boundaries and having their fun, but don't come pissin and moanin to me when it all goes pear shaped n *smile* you over. It's your choice, enjoy if you can. Only ones I ever feel any sympathy for, are the poor bastards gotta go out n risk their own arses trying to rescue them when it's all gone pear shaped.
Plenty of criminologists and law professors on the Marlion Pickett thread in recent weeks.Listen, on this site we have expert engineers, epidemiologists, virologists, political scientists, football analysts, medical doctors, sports scientists, cosmologists and philosophers.
And I'm really only talking about my own qualifications here
In all the examples you have provided there is a narrative.
Put 3 people side by side who you know nothing about & that’s equality regardless of their race, sex or background.
No human life is more valuable than the other.
Sure but I'm very surprised by your take. Would have thought wanting equality for all humanity would be the goal of someone like yourself.Well have to agree to disagree
Sure but I'm very surprised by your take. Would have thought wanting equality for all humanity would be the goal of someone like yourself.
As the pre-eminent submarine engineer, and a leader in marine machine design, I welcome the increase in intelligent posting. Lets hear from more engineers!You should check out social media. Never knew there were so many deep sea submersible experts in the world.
We’re not far apart if at all mate.I want all the good humanity to be more equal than all the bad humanity
.
A sad situation for all involved but there will be some reckoning as it sounds like the submersible was not really fit for purpose and was always going to fail at some point.
DS
In all the examples you have provided there is a narrative.
Put 3 people side by side who you know nothing about & that’s equality regardless of their race, sex or background.
No human life is more valuable than the other.
Interesting viewpoint. Thanks.This is very similar to some extensions of the trolley problem, and a pretty common dilemma.
So if you had 3 random people, and you had to choose one of them to die, using a deontological approach, you might say 'All are equal, so I cannot choose one, or at least, I will choose one at random.'
Now if you happened to know one of them is a mass murderer, or something equally reprehensible, you could use a consequentialist approach and say 'I'll let the murderer die as it leaves me the world overall safer.' even though your deontological approach remains 'Ill do it at random.'
Most people will swing between approaches at random based on what feels right emotively. If you're going to stick to your guns 'All lives are equal in all cases' that's great, but it's not the only ethical approach. And if you're willing to bend toward other approaches at times, then it should be accepted that we did know some about these sub divers. They were not 3 random people. Critically we know they chose to put themselves in a life threatening position for a joyride.
We still would not choose for them to die, and prefer they didn't. But we can assign a quality to their lives, and question resources dedicated to a rescue attempt. E. G. If 4 people had died rescuing these 5, would that have been acceptable given the balance of lives is equal? Or do you assign some quality to the lives of the people in the sub as distinct from the rescuers?
In the end, this whole exercise comprehensively proved that human life is not equal. The amount of energy, interest and resources invested in 5 people's lives who were very unlikely to ever have survived, was infinitely more than all the people on organ transplant waiting lists, dying of hunger, or suffering from preventable infectious disease around the world.
Rich white people are just worth more.
In the end, this whole exercise comprehensively proved that human life is not equal. The amount of energy, interest and resources invested in 5 people's lives who were very unlikely to ever have survived, was infinitely more than all the people on organ transplant waiting lists, dying of hunger, or suffering from preventable infectious disease around the world.
Rich white people are just worth more.