|
|
#33
01-13-2007, 03:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Simpler Question About Future People
[ QUOTE ]
And if you believed in reincarnation, then not giving anything is a no brainer. If you die of cancer in 1000 years, it's no biggie, since you'll just get reincartated. [/ QUOTE ] But loved ones may die of cancer while you are still alive. They will be reincarnated, but you will not know them again in this lifetime. The pain of having lost them will remain with you until you die. 
|
|
#34
01-13-2007, 03:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simpler Question About Future People
[ QUOTE ]
That question is really vague and confusing due to poor word choice. I would not donate any money to guarantee cancer is cured in 1000 years. [/ QUOTE ] Not even $1? $1 is pretty inconsequential to a multimillionaire. To not donate $1 would seem horrifically diabolic to me, since donating $1 and donating $0 is pretty much the same thing to somebody with $10,000,000.
|
|
#35
01-13-2007, 05:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simpler Question About Future People
[ QUOTE ]
So you would donate 10 million if the 90 percent was changed to 99 or 99.9 percent? [/ QUOTE ] Everything goes! gaurantee is better than 99.9 right? If you carry the .9999... to certainty then I'm wasting my money but anything less than certainty is not worth the gamble. leaponthis
|
|
#36
01-13-2007, 05:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simpler Question About Future People
[ QUOTE ]
And if you believed in reincarnation, then not giving anything is a no brainer. If you die of cancer in 1000 years, it's no biggie, since you'll just get reincartated. [/ QUOTE ] Have you ever seen anyone suffering from Cancer? Would you like to face that pain everytime that you are reincanated? Cmon, it's more reason to give up the dough. leaponthis.
|
|
#37
01-13-2007, 07:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simpler Question About Future People
about 2/3 of this thread doesn't know how to read
there's no point in stating that "with modern medicine it will be eradicated before 1000 years blah blah blah" when it has already been stipulated that there is a 10% chance that it will still be around after 1000 years so the question is, given your total net worth of $10M, what is the most that you would pay to have that 10% chance eliminated in 1000 years? mine would be about $0 because I'm selfish and I won't be alive in 1000 years anyways
|
|
#39
01-13-2007, 02:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simpler Question About Future People
basically zero. i mean, i might throw in a few bucks, but i think it's a bit of a waste of cash
1,000 years ago, people's concerns would have focused on a lot of stuff that is pretty irrelevent to us now. I imagine that preoccupations will have changed to a similar degree in the next 3,000 years and that so what i would spend my cash on fixing for the future people would be so far off base from what they want, i might as well spend it on chix and drugs.
|
|
#40
01-13-2007, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simpler Question About Future People
In the 10% instance that cancer isn't completely cured in the next 1000 years, treatment will still be far far better than it is now(short of global catastrophe resulting in halted medical research/treatment). The number of people dying from cancer will likely be very small.
People existing in the present have some higher value to us than people who will exist in the future. They have a greater ability to help/harm us, and provide for a greater effect on the future. My point being that even in the 10% instance that cancer is not cured, it is likely that few people will be dying from it. We have an expected value problem. Are we better off saving more valuable lives with a fraction of our 10 million dollars in the present, or in putting the money towards saving the difference in less valuable lives given by that 10% probability in the future?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
