Yet Another "Axiom" Question

David Sklansky · #1 01-10-2007, 01:52 AM

And again what I mean by that is a question that will shed light on how you approach many questions. And a question that can't really be debated logically.

Suppose there was some scientific procedure that could be implemented that would make everyone on Earth far happier, richer, fulfilled, pleasant, smart, and whatever other adjectives you think are important. There is only one downside.

500 years from now all humans will become sterile. Nor can they be cloned. Humanity ends about 100 years later. Should the procedure be done? If yes, how much smaller than 500 would you accept? If no, how much greater than 500 would be OK? Also if you answered no only because you think God would be angry, what would your answer be if he assured you he wouldn't be?

mikechops · #2 01-10-2007, 02:01 AM

I find the idea of humanity coming to an end terrifying. The idea that a procedure could make me happy and fullfilled despite causing our extinction, is almost as bad.

ALawPoker · #3 01-10-2007, 09:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I find the idea of humanity coming to an end terrifying. The idea that a procedure could make me happy and fullfilled despite causing our extinction, is almost as bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mike (and anyone else who shares this sentiment),

Would the idea of humans evolving into something that is classified as a different species also scare you?

mvdgaag · #4 01-10-2007, 11:21 AM

Assuming our goal is happyness (not individually, but for mankind).
If overall human happyness could be measured and positive happyness would be achieving the goal while negative would be failing to achieve this goal.
Than time*happyness enjoyed (or the surface under the happyness-time curve) would be the total amount of produced happyness...

If you think we should not be put out of our misery (so we are living more moments above the 0 line than below) there's clearly less enjoyed happyness when it stops in 500 years (although there is more happyness to enjoy during these years, except on the end?) compared to the thousands of years of being just a little happy.

If the goal is happyness for this generation, bring it on!

chezlaw · #5 01-10-2007, 02:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
And again what I mean by that is a question that will shed light on how you approach many questions. And a question that can't really be debated logically.

Suppose there was some scientific procedure that could be implemented that would make everyone on Earth far happier, richer, fulfilled, pleasant, smart, and whatever other adjectives you think are important. There is only one downside.

500 years from now all humans will become sterile. Nor can they be cloned. Humanity ends about 100 years later. Should the procedure be done? If yes, how much smaller than 500 would you accept? If no, how much greater than 500 would be OK? Also if you answered no only because you think God would be angry, what would your answer be if he assured you he wouldn't be?

[/ QUOTE ]
if its what everyone wants then sure go for it. If this sterility is being imposed on people then no. The number of years makes no difference to me.

chez

David Sklansky · #6 01-10-2007, 02:52 AM

"if its what everyone wants then sure go for it. If this sterility is being imposed on people then no. The number of years makes no difference to me."

chez

The sterility IS being imposed. On people who do not yet exist. Even if everyone wants the procedure now, there is no doubt many will wish it hadn't been done 470 years from now.

chezlaw · #7 01-10-2007, 03:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
"if its what everyone wants then sure go for it. If this sterility is being imposed on people then no. The number of years makes no difference to me."

chez

The sterility IS being imposed. On people who do not yet exist. Even if everyone wants the procedure now, there is no doubt many will wish it hadn't been done 470 years from now.

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay see the point now. Everyone who currently exists would have to want to be sterile and it would have to be reasonable to believe that existing children would also wish to have had that decision made for them which seems unlikely.

but its not because of any importance atached to the survival of the species. If the sterily occured naturally and everyone was happy with it for long enough to mean there were no children then I see no issue with everyone agreeing not to bother with a cure.

chez

David Sklansky · #8 01-10-2007, 03:13 AM

Chez I am starting to worry about you. Is my English that bad? The sterility kicks in twenty generations from now.

chezlaw · #9 01-10-2007, 03:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Chez I am starting to worry about you. Is my English that bad? The sterility kicks in twenty generations from now.

[/ QUOTE ]
I got that, I'm against it even if its in a bazillion generations. Its only okay if everyone who currently exists okays it. Then there will be no future generations for it to be imposed on.

(I'm more than happy to inflict all sorts of horrors on people will will never exist. Damn now I'm want to sing Black Sabbath songs and that's inflicting a horror on people who do exist.)

chez

Al68 · #10 01-10-2007, 11:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
"if its what everyone wants then sure go for it. If this sterility is being imposed on people then no. The number of years makes no difference to me."

chez

The sterility IS being imposed. On people who do not yet exist. Even if everyone wants the procedure now, there is no doubt many will wish it hadn't been done 470 years from now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it would be impossible that all living humans could ever agree to anything. So this procedure would not be performed on all unless it was forced on all. And would this procedure be performed on people or the planet or what?

If this were a medical procedure, the answer is a no brainer. No way should anyone be forced to do it against their will.