[Newfie]

Nope it seems part of the programming of this website. Oh and yes I can start the topic one if others feel like talking about lifeboat ethics

That old be great. I was hoping a Mod would move the recent related posts over to it. Clean up this mess.

[Tanada]

If I missed any of the lifeboat ethics posts over on the other thread just tag them and I will move them here as well.

[onlooker]

thanks T, for creating the lifeboat topic. As always a diligent moderator. As for the original post, I would say the obvious answer would be to eliminate the old person, as that person has already lived almost all their natural life span. On the other hand, some may decide to eliminate the child because the child cannot in any way offer any assistant to the others. In real life, though perhaps what the occupants would decide is to eliminate that person who is least liked and most abrasive in general or the person in worse health. I personally, if I was on the boat would suggest we hold some sort of raffle or lotto to decide by pure luck who is to be eliminated.

[Newfie]

Thanks Tanda.

[Newfie]

The predecessor discussion from 2007 is interesting because none of them seem to relate it to their current situation as we are doing.

If I can recast the proposition....
We are 1000 folks on an that can sustain 100,
Weare alive only because we have store from our shipwreck which will run out soon,
There is no hope of rescue, we are in our own,
Hurricane season is coming,
On the island with you is your entire extendsed family which numbers 120 in total,
100 women are pregnant including 10 in your family and two of your daughters and wife,
You speak a different language and are of different color than 700,
500 of the 700 will want to eat you when food runs out, including some in your own family.

That's more realistic.

[kiwichick]

if you look at the situation of some Pacific Island countries prior to European intervention ( ie religion ( mainly )) they often practiced infanticide and suicide ( sometimes by taking the oldest least seaworthy canoe and paddling off into the sunset )

see Jared Diamond " how societies choose to succeed or fail "

[ennui2]

They also didn't have the pill and condoms.

[Ibon]

You guys remember the ending of the Grapes of Wrath when Rose of Sharon breast fed the vagrant?

Sometimes starvation and hardships will make us eat each other. And sometimes they invoke a merciful and noble self sacrifice.

We may enter a world soon where we will witness and participate in the most primitive brutality and the most noble of acts. Happening side by side.

One thing can be said, mediocrity will not be rewarded !

[Plantagenet]

I can't imagine a group of people sitting around trying to calmly and logically decide who is the least important and should therefore go take a long swim so that the rest will survive.

When these kinds of situations arise in real life, either some individual sacrifices himself to save the rest (like Capt. Oates on the doomed Scott expedition), or fights break out and the strong kill the weak.

The most famous historical example of this is the Raft of the Medusa, where 147 people were cast adrift on a raft after a shipwreck. After starvation set in the strong people killed and ate the weaker people, until only 15 were still alive when rescued.


The raft of the Medusa by Gericault

[dohboi]

Thanks for that point, Ibon.

And for the art, P!

But when you say, "...or fights break out and the strong kill the weak."

I must point out that also sometimes the 'weak' band together to kill (or overcome) the 'strong.'

And some time the weak just sit back and let the strong duke it out till they've both collapsed, and then they just tiptoe up and cut all the 'strong's' throats, thus inheriting the earth!! (Meak, weak, shmeak, you get the point... )

[Plantagenet]

Thanks for that point, Ibon.

And for the art, P!

But when you say, "...or fights break out and the strong kill the weak."

I must point out that also sometimes the 'weak' band together to kill (or overcome) the 'strong.'

And some time the weak just sit back and let the strong duke it out till they've both collapsed, and then they just tiptoe up and cut all the 'strong's' throats, thus inheriting the earth!! (Meak, weak, shmeak, you get the point... )

Gericault's "Raft of the Medusa" is a huge paining---bigger than lifeize. It hangs in the Louvre in Paris. Its based on a real incident. After a shipwreck 151 men and one woman were stranded on an improvised raft.... a terrible ordeal developed. Dozens were washed into the sea by a storm, others, drunk from wine, rebelled and were killed by officers. The survivors engaged in cannibalism. When supplies ran low, several injured men were thrown into the sea. After 13 days on sea, the raft was found with only 15 men surviving. from wikipedia

This was a French naval vessel manned by proud French military officers and crew....and it only took 13 days to turn them all into something not far from animals killing and eating other to survive.

The rapid descent into savagery on the raft shocked France and Europe in the 19th century. Something quite similar also happened after a British shipwreck off Australia. Sadly, history shows that there really aren't any ethics on a lifeboat when it becomes a survival situation.

[onlooker]

Yes I think they're is wisdom to the proverb the "the meek shall inherit the Earth" This is because ultimately cooperation is a better survival strategy than competition. A house united is stronger than a house divided.

[onlooker]

Competition or savagery or survival of the fittest arises when they're is not enough for everyone. So in our OP lifeboat story and any other scenario. The wisest ones will band together. Two heads are better than one.

[ennui2]

Banding together can have a positive (hippie community) or negative (gangs/warlords) connotation.

[dohboi]

Gericault's "Raft of the Medusa" is a huge paining---bigger than lifeize. It hangs in the Louvre in Paris

Yep, seen it there. Stunning, indeed.

I was their August 2003 when they were stacking up bodies like stinking cordwood in the streets of that lovely city because they were coming in too fast for the morgue to process them all. Tens of thousands died within a week, mostly in Western Europe, from that one heatwave, a heatwave so extreme the calculation was that there was only something like a .001% chance that it could have happened without the added juicing from GW.

I haven't taken and international flight since (and only a couple domestic flights the next year that I had made commitment to).

We are on a lifeboat indeed. And most of us are bashing holes in the hull as fast as we possibly can. As fast as we possibly can.

[onlooker]

Banding together can have a positive (hippie community) or negative (gangs/warlords) connotation.

It is still banding together as in the gang members usually do not prey on each other.

[SeaGypsy]

I find the opposite, your worst potential enemy is your best friend. That's why every hard core gang punishes betrayal with death, yet history shows eventually there is always a betrayer.

Would the smartest kid on the boat betray the weakest kids & ally with the big guy to throw the weaklings in the drink?

[Cid_Yama]

After the collapse, although people may look normal, most will probably have something broken inside.

Example: Say you meet this person, he seems like a great person to team up with, friendly, sociable, seemingly reasonable. But the second you close your eyes, he tries to kill you because he believes you to be the Anti-Christ.

I don't know that 'teaming up' with anyone would be a good idea. Even people you knew before may not be the same.

Remember, we've had the opportunity to go through the grieving ahead of time. Some on here still haven't finished that process. Some haven't even started. Most of the masses will be suffering shock. Instead of governments helping them prepare, they have been kept in the dark and fed shit.

For them, the lights will go off and not come back on again, the faucets stop, and the grocery is closed, never to open again.

What in life has prepared them for that?

[Newfie]

"Teaming up" is also taking side, making coalitions to survive.

What I have noticed is that hen you get someone in a team, a irk crew or a design office, who is not pulling their weight the crowd will gently turn from them. If you fire them too soon you upset the balance. If you wait until the right Time it's like popping a zit, there is general relief.

I always hate firing folks, no matter how much it is needed. I have an otherwise good managers how would rather quit than fire someone, no matter how bad.

Also, while to heads are better than one two stomachs are bigger than one.

Sometimes, in a downturn, the company just can't sustain the workforce, too many stomachs. Some must go or the company goes down.

[onlooker]

That is why I said as long as the resources are sufficient. Now, of course power dynamics are always present so one can expect shifting alliances and power plays of some sort. That is why going back to a more general theme, survivors should stress as much as possible how they are stronger together than separate. How it is a non zero sum game that all have the same common interests and that pooling their talents/skills, intelligence, energy and commitment can give them all a better change of overcoming and surviving. As said before Non loyalty should be severely dissuaded.