D.Kain wrote...
RAF1940 wrote...
D.Kain wrote...
If I knew that my death just saved millions of lives, I wouldn't feel f*cked at all.
It's not about species it's about lives, any lives. But not about those that do not yet live.
Maybe, but Bob in Toronto probably doesn't feel that way when he sees a husk (that used to be his best friend) kill his child.
So a million of Asari should feel better than Bob?
bobdooly wrote...
What I meant was (I admit, I worded it poorly) that you have to think of the long run. Asari have a tendency of betraying people when it suits them. Humans haven't shown such a habit. Asari doctorine would lead to more deaths over time from slavers and imperialists while humans would just deal with the problem.
A rich man who donates $5 gives less than a poor man who donates $1, and you want the cost as low as possible. Think about that for a minute.
I thought the premise was "If a whole species had to go, which would you pick?" not "If a species had to lose [n] billion members, which would you pick?"Luc0s wrote...
But if it's about lives (and I agree that it's about live), than wouldn't you want to preserve as many species as possible?
And knowing that the asari is a much bigger race, with more colonies and a higher population: Wouldn't it make more sense to save humanity first?
Not because humanity is more important or because humanity is your own species, but because humanity is DOOMED if it suffers more than a few billion casualties. This, while the asari could take such a hit and still have a chance to survive.
So basically, humanity is the weaker species.
Doesn't it make more sense to assume that the stronger species can hold their own (for now) and save the weaker species first?
Doesn't it make more sense to assume that the asari for now can hold their own, so you'd better save humanity first?
Modifié par nerdage, 21 août 2011 - 04:42 .
bobdooly wrote...
...Humans haven't shown such a habit.
Luc0s wrote...
I was also talking about the HERE and NOW. I wasn't talking about the unborn. Why do you assume I was?
Please read my comment again and actually answer my question(s) please.
Lets put it this way:
Which species deserves more priority of saving? the turtles, who are at the verge of extinction? Or rats, who are far from being extinct?
nerdage wrote...
I thought the premise was "If a whole species had to go, which would you pick?"
RAF1940 wrote...
I don't really understand what you mean.
Guest_Luc0s_*
D.Kain wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
I was also talking about the HERE and NOW. I wasn't talking about the unborn. Why do you assume I was?
Please read my comment again and actually answer my question(s) please.
Lets put it this way:
Which species deserves more priority of saving? the turtles, who are at the verge of extinction? Or rats, who are far from being extinct?
I did answer, you just didn't get it.
You ask me which species deserves saving, I answer - all species are equal on their rights to live. I will save more lives, not depending on the species. If I have a choice between saving more Asari than Humans, I will save more Asari.
Modifié par Luc0s, 21 août 2011 - 04:46 .
D.Kain wrote...
RAF1940 wrote...
I don't really understand what you mean.
I mean there will be a million Asari watching their friends turning to husks and feel the same way as Bob. So I'd rather save millions of Asari Bobs rather than 1 human Bob.
Luc0s wrote...
D.Kain wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
I was also talking about the HERE and NOW. I wasn't talking about the unborn. Why do you assume I was?
Please read my comment again and actually answer my question(s) please.
Lets put it this way:
Which species deserves more priority of saving? the turtles, who are at the verge of extinction? Or rats, who are far from being extinct?
I did answer, you just didn't get it.
You ask me which species deserves saving, I answer - all species are equal on their rights to live. I will save more lives, not depending on the species. If I have a choice between saving more Asari than Humans, I will save more Asari.
Okay that's fair enough. But what about this:
What if there are exactly 1 billion asari and 1 billion humans left? And you have to choose: Save the 1 billion asari or the 1 billion humans?
Both option saves an equal amount of lves (exactly 1 billion), the only difference is that with option A, you save 1 billion asari lifes and with option B you save 1 billion human lifes.
Which one would you choose?
Rendering the 'protect the weaker species' argument moot.RAF1940 wrote...
nerdage wrote...
I thought the premise was "If a whole species had to go, which would you pick?"
My scenario for the thread is this:
If you save the humans, the asari ALL die. And vice-versa.
Just hypothetical.
Luc0s wrote...
Okay that's fair enough. But what about this:
What if there are exactly 1 billion asari and 1 billion humans left? And you have to choose: Save the 1 billion asari or the 1 billion humans?
Both option saves an equal amount of lves (exactly 1 billion), the only difference is that with option A, you save 1 billion asari lifes and with option B you save 1 billion human lifes.
Which one would you choose?
Guest_Luc0s_*
D.Kain wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
Okay that's fair enough. But what about this:
What if there are exactly 1 billion asari and 1 billion humans left? And you have to choose: Save the 1 billion asari or the 1 billion humans?
Both option saves an equal amount of lves (exactly 1 billion), the only difference is that with option A, you save 1 billion asari lifes and with option B you save 1 billion human lifes.
Which one would you choose?
Humans, because now that the lives are even, I can mix in my personal preferences.
Luc0s wrote...
D.Kain wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
Okay that's fair enough. But what about this:
What if there are exactly 1 billion asari and 1 billion humans left? And you have to choose: Save the 1 billion asari or the 1 billion humans?
Both option saves an equal amount of lves (exactly 1 billion), the only difference is that with option A, you save 1 billion asari lifes and with option B you save 1 billion human lifes.
Which one would you choose?
Humans, because now that the lives are even, I can mix in my personal preferences.
Okay, thank you for answering.
I now exactly understand where you're comming from and I'm happy to inform that I think you and I pretty much share the same opinion.
Luc0s wrote...
Okay, thank you for answering.
I now exactly understand where you're comming from and I'm happy to inform that I think you and I pretty much share the same opinion.
RAF1940 wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
D.Kain wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
Okay that's fair enough. But what about this:
What if there are exactly 1 billion asari and 1 billion humans left? And you have to choose: Save the 1 billion asari or the 1 billion humans?
Both option saves an equal amount of lves (exactly 1 billion), the only difference is that with option A, you save 1 billion asari lifes and with option B you save 1 billion human lifes.
Which one would you choose?
Humans, because now that the lives are even, I can mix in my personal preferences.
Okay, thank you for answering.
I now exactly understand where you're comming from and I'm happy to inform that I think you and I pretty much share the same opinion.
RAF1940 wrote...
Pockles wrote...
I can't be the only American that gets tired of being included in broad generalizations. It's starting to get really insulting.
I included the word "majority" for a reason. It wasn't a generalization because of that. It would be if I said "all Americans".
I by no means think all Americans are like that. I know a few that aren't. However, about 95% of the ones I know are like that. And I don't blame them. I blame the media and geography.
Guest_Luc0s_*
Pockles wrote...
And the majority of Americans is, by definition, just over 150 million people. You're speaking for that 150 million as if you're personally acquainted with their particular level of ignorance.
Luc0s wrote...
@D.Kain:
I have another interesting proposition for you.
If you could save exactly 15 billion lives and not a single life more or less, how would you divide that 15 billion over the asari and humans? (lets forget about the other species for now and focus on humans and asari)
Keep in mind that there are roughly 10 billion humans alive and probably 1 trillion asari (or at least 50 billion).
My "pie" would look like this:
10 billion humans.
5 billion asari.
Guest_Luc0s_*
D.Kain wrote...
Luc0s wrote...
Okay, thank you for answering.
I now exactly understand where you're comming from and I'm happy to inform that I think you and I pretty much share the same opinion.
Almost the same opinion. As I understood from your previous posts, even though you would love to save everyone you would still sacrifice more Asari, just to preserve the Human species.
Guest_Ferris95_*
Luc0s wrote...
@D.Kain:
I have another interesting proposition for you.
If you could save exactly 15 billion lives and not a single life more or less, how would you divide that 15 billion over the asari and humans? (lets forget about the other species for now and focus on humans and asari)
Keep in mind that there are roughly 10 billion humans alive and probably 1 trillion asari (or at least 50 billion).
My "pie" would look like this:
10 billion humans.
5 billion asari.
Luc0s wrote...
@D.Kain:
I have another interesting proposition for you.
If you could save exactly 15 billion lives and not a single life more or less, how would you divide that 15 billion over the asari and humans? (lets forget about the other species for now and focus on humans and asari)
Keep in mind that there are roughly 10 billion humans alive and probably 1 trillion asari (or at least 50 billion).
My "pie" would look like this:
10 billion humans.
5 billion asari.
Retour en haut