The book of questions, Volume 65
Friday is The Book of Questions Day around these parts.
Today’s question comes from the aptly titled book “The Book of Questions” by Gregory Stock, Ph.D.
And here it is, Question 63.
Assume there were a technological break-through that would allow people to travel as easily and cheaply between continents as between nearby cities. Unfortunately, there would also be 100,000 deaths a year from the device. Would you try to prevent its use?
In the mid 1800s, had you been able to look into the future and see that the automobile would cause five million fatalities in the next century, how would you have felt about this new device? Is there scientific knowledge that is best left undiscovered? If so, what areas of research do you feel should be restricted?
Homey ain’t a protester; no, I would not try to prevent its use.
When I read this question I immediately thought of the disclaimers that are provided for all of the prescription medications out there. I do believe those disclaimers are necessary. But let’s assume there was a medication out there promising 100% health however it listed no side effects.
I wouldn’t take it whether the folks who did had awesome results or tragic results. I’m not much of a risk taker. Slow and steady wins the race, gingah.
Further, I would not join a cause to ban its production or use. In that scenario no one is forcing another person to ingest that medication. It’s a personal choice. And I choose no.
Anyway, it never occurred to me that technology — such as PDAs, computers, cars, airplanes, etc. — could or should have disclaimers. It strikes me as odd to consider a disclaimer coming with my mp3 player.
I can’t imagine what it would say beyond, excessive use at high volumes may cause loss of hearing. Okay, I’ll take that chance. I like to rock out on the elliptical machine.
Now to the past. If I saw those statistics regarding the automobile I would be totally freaked out and I would try to convince my family not to use that steel stallion.
In black and white, five million deaths is pretty staggering. But considering the population I suppose it’s not that excessive.
Keeping that in mind, 100,000 deaths in the other example seems sort of tame by comparison. Regardless, it’s not enough to get me walkin’ the line with a picket sign in my hand.
Now what areas of research do I think should be banned? Cloning. That’s just too bizarre and I cannot wrap my mind around that. But what if cloning was approved? It would freak me out but I can’t see how cloning would impact me personally.
Here’s the only way I can see that cloning might affect me personally.
If I were 70 and slingin’ hash because Social Security crapped out on me, I would be really freaked out to find my own clone as my boss. I guess, since I’m now 41, my clone would have to be younger than 29 in this scenario. I’d have to quit and find another job.
Or maybe I’d have a heart attack upon seeing my clone and then that problem would be solved.
p.s. Don’t forget to play Spot the Low Top in the VIP Lounge. Look for the line, “I got the low top” somewhere in the comments. When you find that phrase, you will discover who’s It today.
And then we will have fun and experience much joy.
Honestly, I think at least part of this one is a moot question. There are so many laws and regulations now, that something causing 100k deaths a year would never fly in the marketplace… because the regulators wouldn’t let it. (At least, in the transportation department. Big Pharma is a TOTALLY different story.)
That said, I suppose it’s all in how those deaths occur. Is it because of some fault in the technology? Is it because of human error? Is it a bunch of drunk “drivers”? The first two might get me onto some petitions, maybe a protest or two. The last? Well, see, that’s not anything I can control, other than avoiding those idiots.
I’m really not cool with banning aspects of science, unless we know it leads to evil. I.e., Eugenics – which is not really a true science, anyway, but you get my point. I would like to ban “scientific” endeavors that are funded by those who deliberately alter outcomes and/or screw with the scientific process so much it is no longer research (i.e., pretty much most anti-climate change, anti tobacco-causes-cancer stuff).
Now don’t get all realistic on me, Rebecca :)
Hmm, I’d say the deaths are from the fault of the technology and the deaths helped improve that piece of the puzzle. No drunk drivers.
At first I thought you meant that 100,000 people would randomly die every year, in trade for the technology. I would fight that. But if it’s like, “drunk beamers” wasting themselves by pushing the wrong buttons – nope. I wanna go to Australia, and the U.K., and Africa…. I’ll go sober and safely, and just get hammered when I get there.
Based on other questions this dude has asked, I could totally see him throwing that scenario out there. And I ain’t dyin’ just cause someone wants to go from Detroit to Egypt in four hours.
I like your method of passing the time on your way to parts unknown.
When I first read the first half of your question, I immediately knee-jerked and said, “Yep, let’s ban the damn thing,” but then your logic got me. It’s true that cars lead to many, many deaths per year, yet they are not illegal. And we do everything we can to make them safer (traffic tickets, seatbelt laws, child carseat laws, safety features built into each vehicle), yet people still die. I do think warning labels are getting out of hand too. There was one on the gate to my friend’s courtyard in front of her apartment complex warning the residents may smoke there and the smoke is known to the state of California to cause all these problems. And it was an outdoor courtyard! (I have a picture of it to boot.) I am not a smoker, but I got the low-top, and I still think it’s excessive.
As far as banning science, mmmm no thanks. That is a slippery slope that once started down, there’s no way to stop till all new research is banned. I don’t even really want to ban cloning, though as long as our clones aren’t sentient I think they can really be a boon to us. If someone needs a new liver or a new heart, why, just go shopping over at your clone, and your body won’t reject it because it’s your own tissue! Or maybe I’ve been reading too much Heinlein again…
*sings “I found it, I found it*, while having fun and experiencing much joy ;)
@blue Get outta here. There was a disclaimer on the GATE regarding second-hand smoke? That is getting out of hand, and to get stereotypical for a minute, I can believe that sign was seen in California.
I wonder, if you did snag a heart from your clone cause you really, really needed it, if the clone would be pissed off.
@Soonerchick This is fun and it does cause much joy.
No I wouldn’t try to prevent it.
I love your brevity, Angelika.
Live and let live. People hang glide which I think is one of the stupidest ideas ever but if they want to run into a cliff, that’s their business.
I think cloning is the most fascinating part of science, unfortunately studying genetics is like Biochem on steroids and homey don’t play that game.
There are tons o’ risk takers out there. I just saw a really disturbing video over at ER Stories about the guy who did some cliff diving. You may have seen it. That was nuts.
Yeah, if by nuts you mean horrifyingly disgusting. And stupid. And proving Darwin correct.
Yes. To all of that.
When I read part one of the question I immediately thought of that new movie thats come out called “The Box”. Where a stranger appears at your door and offers you money to push the button in the box, but knowing that someone, somewhere will die because of it.
Then I read the second part of the question, and that gave me pause to think. It does seem like that with any technological advancement there is always a sacrifice. Sometimes felt immediately, sometimes with longer term affects.
With that – I have no answer. Although I’d love to be able flit to Europe as fast as I could drive / ferry to Vancouver.
I saw that too and wondered if it came from one of these questions. When I think of the population we’re talking about — I assume it’s all first-world countries — 100K really seems low.
Do random people die, or just the people who are doing the travel? That would make a big difference to me.
Either way, I say no. First of all, I don’t like to travel THAT MUCH. 100,000 is a lot of people. I mean, 9/11 was less than a tenth of that and look what happened from that.
Travel? Meh. I’d rather stay here. Now, if they made a device that would let me sleep in until 9:00 AM every Saturday, that would be worth it.
Umm, no random people die. Man I love making all of the executive decisions on these questions. I’m drunk with power, I tell you.
Having said that, you bring up a really compelling point with 9/11. The experience is perceived so differently because of the intent. If a plane went down near the World Trade Center and it was some sort of crazy human error that was not at all related to terrorism, I think it would have been perceived differently.
I’d be down with the Saturday Sleeping device as well. Someone needs to contact Stephen Hawking.
Uh, yeah it would have been perceived differently and we wouldn’t have our bravest out there in the Sand Pit.
I’m sorry y’all don’t get to sleep until 9am or later? I’d be bummed, but I’ve been known to sleep until 3pm. I’m still a teenager like that.
I don’t think I could make myself sleep past 10 am. Noon could not happen and there’s no chance I could handle shut eye til 3. But as you know, I’m up early, early.
Yes, I’m not sure if I ever been up at 4:30 or whatever your alarm is set to. I do set my alarm for 5:15 when I have a plane to catch, twice a year.
No kiddos so I stay up til 5am instead of the other way around. I’m a night owl. I don’t feel alive until 10pm. Believe it or not, third shift was never a problem for me.
Hmm, the question is a little vague. 100,000 out of how many? Do I have a chance of dying, using the travel method? If the statistics are low enough, like if using the method is about the same risk of being hit by lightning or winning the lotto, then that’s a chance I’ll take.
I’d ask the same question about the car thing. When it’s out of context like that, it doesn’t really make sense to me.
Okay, taking out the boring statistician side of me, I’d say YEA to all as I love to travel. By plane, train or automobile! By mylar balloon! By futuristic device! By unicycle! Ok, scratch that last one.
I’m going to say 100K out of all inhabitants of first-world countries. That’s gotta be a lot, right?
And yes, you have a chance of dying using the travel method.
I think it would be fun to ride a unicycle. I’d be really impressed with my own sense of balance if I could master one of those. Looks like I can make that dream come true at ebay for less than $45.
Grabs pen and adds unicycle to her Christmas list.
I was creeped out by cloning, but now I’m totally on BlueSleepy’s side. Mostly because I’m surely gonna need to trade in this liver on a fresh model in a decade or so, and I want a quality match at the ready. But while we’re at it? I’ll take my tits and ass from 1986 too. And pretty much all the skin on my face and neck. Hey, it’s my clone — getcher own!
In the stupid disclaimer category, I gotta nominate Mike’s electric razor, which has a little tag on the plug with a pair of scissors with a slash through them. Meaning, you know, while you’re shaving your face while the razor’s plugged in, you shouldn’t simultaneously SAW THROUGH THE ELECTRICAL CORD. (Slaps self in face.) But my all-time number one Stupidly Senseless Disclaimer would be the hair dryer I had in the mid-90s that had this on the tag:
“DO NOT USE WHILE SLEEPING.”
??!??!
(laughs) Your clone would be one-stop shopping. I can see the ad campaign right now: Leggo my clone, getcher own!
Now I seriously want to watch someone saw through the cord of an electric razor. Is that show Jackass still on the air?
I’m still crying too much to comment. You know why, CG!
So 0.03% of the US population dies every year in car wrecks?
Around 4 million babies are born here in the USA every year. Only 100k dying on the road leaves LOTS of room for cancer & heart attacks and all the other fun things that kill us.
I would like to think that almost 100% of those 100,000 are those jerks that cause all the trouble on the road, but I know this isn’t true. It’s too bad.
The world would be a different place if Karma really did get ya, wouldn’t it?
Ooh, that would be an interesting premise for a story. Got NaNo on the mind.
Wooo! I got blocked again! Ten more points for me!
:-D
Yes! Go for the bonus round. I know you can do it! Do it!
That book I recently read, called “Double Identity” had to do with cloning. The parents had lost their 16 year old daughter and had her cloned. It would be really creepy to lose a child and then have another identical child and know ahead of time what they would look like and what their favorite foods would be, etc.
Of course, right now I am listening to “The Time Traveller’s Wife” (didn’t want to wait out the long line at the library for the hard copy), and that would probably fit this hypothetical question.
What if we could time travel, fully knowing the risks may end in death? I think many people would grab that chance. Imagine being able to go back and tell your previous self not to ever speak to your brother-in-law.
Wouldn’t that be worth a little risk? I’m afraid to articulate what I would be tempted to go back and tell my former self.
Ai yai. Naturally it would be devastating to lose a child, but cloning it for Act II? Could. Not. Handle. That.
But a really interesting concept for a book. I’ll have to pick that one up on December 1.
Man there’s no way I would time travel. Seriously, I have no regrets in life so far. I feel as if I’ve told everyone everything I have to say. Although it is a compelling idea jumping back in time to reveal the BIL’s true intentions. Fucker.
If you clone someone, wouldn’t it be like identical twins? They very well could have totally different personalities, fave foods, etc. Did you know Mary Kate and Ashley are fraternal? The womb is a crazy place.
Time travel? I don’t even like to normal travel. I could save myself a lot of time with some ex boyfriends though. I would be so mad if I didn’t listen to my futuristic self.
Wow, your BIL must be a real winner.
That’s one of the parts I cannot wrap my head around. Is the clone EXACTLY the same? I don’t know.
I did not know that the Olson’s were not identical. They look identical. Wow. That is some crazy stuff in the womb.
Yes, he’s a real jackass. Someday I’ll have to write a NaNo project about that.