3 ms·
Re: who is right So long as; the participants are willing, the death rate is in the single percents per mission,the mission value add on terms of new capabilit
by tomrod 3y ago
Re: who is right
So long as; the participants are willing, the death rate is in the single percents per mission,the mission value add on terms of new capability is high, the risk is probably worth it. At least in my opinion.
- adastra22 3y agoI’m very much a believer in informed consent. The astronauts will tell you, to a person, that they’d take that risk. Who am we to say otherwise?
- cameldrv 3y agoThis makes a lot of sense in one way, but the weird thing is that it's not just the astronaut's own lives that we have to consider. Personally, I've had some risky hobbies. I accepted the risk, and if I'd died doing them, I might have gotten in the local newspaper, but nothing beyond that. The Challenger explosion was a moment that defined a generation. Some of that was that Christa McAuliffe was supposed to talk to millions of kids once she got into orbit, but some was just what people projected onto the astronauts generally. When the three astronauts died in the Apollo 1 fire, no one shed a tear for the 30,000 man-years of effort that went into making the rocket that was destroyed. The effect was about the men themselves, who were considered national heroes, and also what it might have said about the United States that those men died. Maybe we should treat this differently. Maybe in prior ages of exploration, we did. Back then we didn't have live TV or the internet though that could capture our emotion in the same way, and also in prior ages, not all expeditions were as closely connected with the nation itself.