>His point was that there are no odds that would rationally allow a parent to bet the life of their child for a quarter. Human nature just doesn’t work that way

>His point was that there are no odds that would rationally allow a parent to bet the life of their child for a quarter. Human nature just doesn’t work that way, and it shouldn’t work that way. People have done this for most of history. Working a farm, for example, is non-trivially dangerous and fairly low profit. Children often helped on the farm in rural communities from a young age. So every time you had your child work the farm you were rolling some dice. Over and over. But eventually those quarters add up to enough to put food on the table so it was rational to roll them. This seems like the sort of philosophical argument only someone who has grown up a very privileged life and hasn't experienced much else would make. To them it is inherently wrong but to other it is simply part of life. Which inherently makes it no longer a universal axiom but a matter cultural upbringing.