Suppose Cassandra somehow knows that exactly five years from now, a doomsday event would happen which would cause the immediate death of 99.99+% of humanity, leaving a small number of survivors. No other humans are aware of what Cassandra knows, and though Cassandra tries to warn the rest of humanity about the event, no one believes her.
Suppose Cassandra then discovers a way to DELAY (but not ultimately prevent) that doomsday event by one year, so that it occurs exactly six years from now instead of five years from now. She goes ahead and implements the delay, thereby granting most of humanity one additional year of life.
Doomsday arrives on year 6, and indeed, 99.99+% of humanity dies, leaving a small number of survivors.
Now, here's the philosophical question for this thread: Did Cassandra accomplish anything meaningful or of value by delaying doomsday for one year, or is what she did meaningless/worthless because doomsday still arrived anyway with only a fairly minimal delay? Is Cassandra a success or a failure?
- Jon Finkel Facts: (follow the link at left to see more Facts, or add more Facts!)
- Chuck Norris counted to infinity twice—because he was trying to count how much damage Jon Finkel deals in an average game.
- Jon Finkel believes in maintaining a healthy, balanced diet. He gets all his fiber from eating Magic cards for breakfast, and all his protein from eating Magic players for lunch.
Suppose Cassandra somehow knows that exactly five years from now, a doomsday event would happen which would cause the immediate death of 99.99+% of humanity, leaving a small number of survivors. No other humans are aware of what Cassandra knows, and though Cassandra tries to warn the rest of humanity about the event, no one believes her.
Suppose Cassandra then discovers a way to DELAY (but not ultimately prevent) that doomsday event by one year, so that it occurs exactly six years from now instead of five years from now. She goes ahead and implements the delay, thereby granting most of humanity one additional year of life.
Doomsday arrives on year 6, and indeed, 99.99+% of humanity dies, leaving a small number of survivors.
Now, here's the philosophical question for this thread: Did Cassandra accomplish anything meaningful or of value by delaying doomsday for one year, or is what she did meaningless/worthless because doomsday still arrived anyway?
I suppose ultimately it is meaningless because once those people are gone, they won't be around to value the extra time they got, but during the time they were alive it had meaning to them. This sort of blends into the relativity of morals and universal meaning.
Though perhaps people could have more time to prepare for any part of humanity they thought would survive, I know there's huge (publicly known about, but I can't remember the name of them) underground domes somewhere such as in Europe that are suppose to be helpful in the event of a giant meteor and contain a bunch of supplies and space, so perhaps once people were warned they would need as much time as they could get to build stuff like that.
Suppose Cassandra somehow knows that exactly five years from now, a doomsday event would happen which would cause the immediate death of 99.99+% of humanity, leaving a small number of survivors. No other humans are aware of what Cassandra knows, and though Cassandra tries to warn the rest of humanity about the event, no one believes her.
Suppose Cassandra then discovers a way to DELAY (but not ultimately prevent) that doomsday event by one year, so that it occurs exactly six years from now instead of five years from now. She goes ahead and implements the delay, thereby granting most of humanity one additional year of life.
Doomsday arrives on year 6, and indeed, 99.99+% of humanity dies, leaving a small number of survivors.
Now, here's the philosophical question for this thread: Did Cassandra accomplish anything meaningful or of value by delaying doomsday for one year, or is what she did meaningless/worthless because doomsday still arrived anyway?
On your deathbed, you get the option of extending your life a year, or dying right then. Wouldn't you take it?
Yes, of course it's meaningful.
We're all going to die, the world will end, humanity will become extinct, the entirety of civilization balances on a knife's edge; all of these are true every single second of every single day, and always have been true. It has never invalidated the fact that how you spend your time is meaningful.
actually, if we are to believe michio kaku or the supposed developments of medicine/biology, we could very well be able to live forever in the near future. there are already some organisms that, given proper conditions, will never die from old age.
of course that doesn't mean that anybody who didn't live forever wasn't important or their time was not valued. there are several people, for better or for worse, did great things in a single year. There are (relatively and purely objectively) great things that were done in a single day.
I think an extra year of life for all of humanity is meaningful. In total that's what? 8 billion years of human lives she has saved? Not a small accomplishment.
I think an extra year of life for all of humanity is meaningful. In total that's what? 8 billion years of human lives she has saved? Not a small accomplishment.
Exactly this.
6 billion years of life is the equivalent of saving 100,000,000 twenty year olds who live to be 80.
Most people in this thread so far have expressed the view that Cassandra did accomplish something.
The thing is, though, if I put myself in Cassandra's shoes, if I were Cassandra, regardless of the year of time I bought for everybody, I know I would feel like a total failure for being unable to ultimately avert doomsday.
Why, though? The example states that you know doomsday is inevitable.
Knowledge is so precious that there's almost no way you could relate to possessing it; but if it's real knowledge then it is certainty, a certainty that implies the statement is true, that the disaster is unavoidable.
It's not somebody else's statement that the disaster is unavoidable. It's knowledge that is afforded to you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Why, though? The example states that you know doomsday is inevitable.
Knowledge is so precious that there's almost no way you could relate to possessing it; but if it's real knowledge then it is certainty, a certainty that implies the statement is true, that the disaster is unavoidable.
It's not somebody else's statement that the disaster is unavoidable. It's knowledge that is afforded to you.
The original post doesn't state that doomsday is inevitable. It says that, without interference, doomsday will happen. Cassandra found a way to stave it off by a year, but she was unable to find a way to stave it off more permanently. Therein is her failure.
The original post doesn't state that doomsday is inevitable.
a doomsday event would happen which would cause the immediate death of 99.99+% of humanity
Would =! may or might
It says that, without interference, doomsday will happen.
I think its very clear that doomsday in the OP can't be avoided.
If it could have been avoided, then the question wouldn't be "Did Cassandra accomplish anything meaningful or of value by delaying doomsday for one year, or is what she did meaningless/worthless because doomsday still arrived anyway with only a fairly minimal delay? As phrased, the assumption is that the events was something Cassandra couldn't have prevented. The replies also reflect this -- they are all made on the understanding that Cassandra cannot avoid doomsday. Obviously, if it could have, then failure would have been failing to prevent it, and the discussion we're having would be completely different.
Point out where the OP said this. I think its very clear that doomsday in the OP can't be avoided.
Hi, I'm the original poster.
I'm not sure where some of you are getting the idea that doomsday is inevitable, because TempoTempo is correct that the original post did not imply this.
In fact, the whole point of this question is that doomsday is possibly NOT inevitable, but that Cassandra could not find a way to avert it permanently, only delay it by one year.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
- Jon Finkel Facts: (follow the link at left to see more Facts, or add more Facts!)
- Chuck Norris counted to infinity twice—because he was trying to count how much damage Jon Finkel deals in an average game.
- Jon Finkel believes in maintaining a healthy, balanced diet. He gets all his fiber from eating Magic cards for breakfast, and all his protein from eating Magic players for lunch.
the point exists though that even in delaying it for a year you give her and by extension humanity another year to entirely avert the disaster.
if the reverse were true and she had known humanity would be wiped out in a year and said screw it and accelerated it to 6 months that would be monstrous.
Yes, She gave humanity a hope/chance to have someone else raise the occasion and stop it cold. without her maybe the solution would not have had the chance to apear. in effect she gave humanity a "buff" so it could try and eke out an few days/months chance to solve the problem. Buying time IS doing something. Yes ulitmately in the situation given she did not have someone raise to the occasion, She gave humanity hope that someone would. In effect she acted as a church would giving people peace of mind that someone else may deal with the problem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Suppose Cassandra then discovers a way to DELAY (but not ultimately prevent) that doomsday event by one year, so that it occurs exactly six years from now instead of five years from now. She goes ahead and implements the delay, thereby granting most of humanity one additional year of life.
Doomsday arrives on year 6, and indeed, 99.99+% of humanity dies, leaving a small number of survivors.
Now, here's the philosophical question for this thread: Did Cassandra accomplish anything meaningful or of value by delaying doomsday for one year, or is what she did meaningless/worthless because doomsday still arrived anyway with only a fairly minimal delay? Is Cassandra a success or a failure?
- Jon Finkel believes in maintaining a healthy, balanced diet. He gets all his fiber from eating Magic cards for breakfast, and all his protein from eating Magic players for lunch.
Is it meaningless to save you from drowning right now because you're going to be dead 1 to 50 years from now anyway?
Everybody born before the American civil war is now dead. What was the point of their living?
I suppose ultimately it is meaningless because once those people are gone, they won't be around to value the extra time they got, but during the time they were alive it had meaning to them. This sort of blends into the relativity of morals and universal meaning.
Though perhaps people could have more time to prepare for any part of humanity they thought would survive, I know there's huge (publicly known about, but I can't remember the name of them) underground domes somewhere such as in Europe that are suppose to be helpful in the event of a giant meteor and contain a bunch of supplies and space, so perhaps once people were warned they would need as much time as they could get to build stuff like that.
On your deathbed, you get the option of extending your life a year, or dying right then. Wouldn't you take it?
Yes, of course it's meaningful.
We're all going to die, the world will end, humanity will become extinct, the entirety of civilization balances on a knife's edge; all of these are true every single second of every single day, and always have been true. It has never invalidated the fact that how you spend your time is meaningful.
If Cassandra manages to prevent the death of person A for a year, yeah, I'd say that was an accomplishment.
If Cassandra manages to prevent the death of A, B3, C44, D99, E1000, Z100000, etc, for 6 years, even more so.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
of course that doesn't mean that anybody who didn't live forever wasn't important or their time was not valued. there are several people, for better or for worse, did great things in a single year. There are (relatively and purely objectively) great things that were done in a single day.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Exactly this.
6 billion years of life is the equivalent of saving 100,000,000 twenty year olds who live to be 80.
I really think it's silly to think of it like that. They are not equivalent in any way.
Is there some freedom that is worth denying to do it?
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
The thing is, though, if I put myself in Cassandra's shoes, if I were Cassandra, regardless of the year of time I bought for everybody, I know I would feel like a total failure for being unable to ultimately avert doomsday.
Knowledge is so precious that there's almost no way you could relate to possessing it; but if it's real knowledge then it is certainty, a certainty that implies the statement is true, that the disaster is unavoidable.
It's not somebody else's statement that the disaster is unavoidable. It's knowledge that is afforded to you.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
The original post doesn't state that doomsday is inevitable. It says that, without interference, doomsday will happen. Cassandra found a way to stave it off by a year, but she was unable to find a way to stave it off more permanently. Therein is her failure.
Would =! may or might
I think its very clear that doomsday in the OP can't be avoided.
If it could have been avoided, then the question wouldn't be "Did Cassandra accomplish anything meaningful or of value by delaying doomsday for one year, or is what she did meaningless/worthless because doomsday still arrived anyway with only a fairly minimal delay? As phrased, the assumption is that the events was something Cassandra couldn't have prevented. The replies also reflect this -- they are all made on the understanding that Cassandra cannot avoid doomsday. Obviously, if it could have, then failure would have been failing to prevent it, and the discussion we're having would be completely different.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Hi, I'm the original poster.
I'm not sure where some of you are getting the idea that doomsday is inevitable, because TempoTempo is correct that the original post did not imply this.
In fact, the whole point of this question is that doomsday is possibly NOT inevitable, but that Cassandra could not find a way to avert it permanently, only delay it by one year.
- Jon Finkel believes in maintaining a healthy, balanced diet. He gets all his fiber from eating Magic cards for breakfast, and all his protein from eating Magic players for lunch.
if the reverse were true and she had known humanity would be wiped out in a year and said screw it and accelerated it to 6 months that would be monstrous.