4 ms·

Comparing going down with the ship to dying for a cause seems like a false equivalence. When a ship sinks, the outcome is more or less the same whether people a

Comparing going down with the ship to dying for a cause seems like a false equivalence. When a ship sinks, the outcome is more or less the same whether people are onboard or not: in either case the ship will sink. The only difference is whether or not the passengers / crew survive. Fighting for a cause, on the other hand, generally requires that people sacrifice themselves. If no one is willing to die, then the fight is very unlikely to be successful. Being willing to die (and sometimes dying) has the ability meaningful change the outcome.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Supermancho 2y ago
> seems like a false equivalence. When a ship sinks, It seems that way, but that's a subjective stance. This is during a time when ships were the armies of the time. It's not complicated to understand that 250 men were worth less than a ship for the purposes of late 1700s warfare. Dying for a sinking ship was a heroic thing, in that it was an attempt to hold on to an immense power for their country. How many untold millions have died to defend a parcel of land? The value of trying to save a ship is contextual, equating to defending your country, even in the face of insurmountable odds.
- hgomersall 2y ago
  Trained and capable seaman were very valuable. It took many years to train someone in the proper functioning of the ship, and given that many raw recruits were typically whomever was rounded up on the streets of Portsmouth at midnight, the quality of the input varied wildly. I'm fairly confident the British navy had huge difficulty manning their ships properly.
  - Supermancho 2y ago
    > I'm fairly confident the British navy had huge difficulty manning their ships properly. "very valuable" compared to a ship? Not so much. > It took many years to train someone in the proper functioning of the ship I'm not sure where you get this from. Many duties on ships could be successfully crewed by children^. Crew were commonly pressed into service, in lieu of volunteers and proper enlisted (transferred, et al). Debtors looking for debt-forgiveness, were a particularly fruitful source. Slaves were sometimes used. Training was on the job. Operational sailing circa 1800, wasn't particularly sophisticated. It was danger-prone. ^https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1044940/Diary-18th-century-sailor-provides-fascinating-insight-life-decks-Nelsons-navy.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1044940/Diary-18th-...
    - hgomersall 2y ago
      Sailing circa 1800 was certainly danger prone, but it was also very sophisticated. Manoeuvring a three mast ship of the line takes multiple synchronised actions involving hundreds of men, at least a significant fraction of whom need to know what they are doing. This is an interesting read on the general question of manning the Royal Navy in the Napoleonic era: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:a2cf9a3d-daf2-446b-88c8-41a0bd86f10b/files/m05c79fc6f11c37ab16be9f3775df5e7a https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:a2cf9a3d-daf2-446b-88c8-41...
      - Supermancho 2y ago
        > Manoeuvring a three mast ship of the line takes multiple synchronised actions involving hundreds of men, at least a significant fraction of whom need to know what they are doing. They needed to know how to do relatively straightforward tasks (many of which were unpleasant) when directed. Same as any other structured military force or industrial line. It was not sophisticated for the vast majority of sailors. Skills varied to be sure. Debating soft terms like skillful, sophistication, and value will not definitively answer the question of a calculation. We look to other signals, like culture. The culture was such that the ships (including weaponry and anything else worth salvage) were more valuable than manpower by virtue of the historical figure sentiments. I have not seen a compelling contradiction.
Someone 2y ago
> When a ship sinks, the outcome is more or less the same whether people are onboard or not: in either case the ship will sink The more difficult question is when a ship is on the brink of sinking. Then, having people on board can make a difference: the extra weight can make it sink, or actions by those people (pumping, plugging holes, closing doors) can prevent it from sinking. For the captain, the difficult thing is to figure out whether a ship is destined to sink or not.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Supermancho 2y ago

> seems like a false equivalence. When a ship sinks, It seems that way, but that's a subjective stance. This is during a time when ships were the armies of the time. It's not complicated to understand that 250 men were worth less than a ship for the purposes of late 1700s warfare. Dying for a sinking ship was a heroic thing, in that it was an attempt to hold on to an immense power for their country. How many untold millions have died to defend a parcel of land? The value of trying to save a ship is contextual, equating to defending your country, even in the face of insurmountable odds.

hgomersall 2y ago
Trained and capable seaman were very valuable. It took many years to train someone in the proper functioning of the ship, and given that many raw recruits were typically whomever was rounded up on the streets of Portsmouth at midnight, the quality of the input varied wildly. I'm fairly confident the British navy had huge difficulty manning their ships properly.
- Supermancho 2y ago
  > I'm fairly confident the British navy had huge difficulty manning their ships properly. "very valuable" compared to a ship? Not so much. > It took many years to train someone in the proper functioning of the ship I'm not sure where you get this from. Many duties on ships could be successfully crewed by children^. Crew were commonly pressed into service, in lieu of volunteers and proper enlisted (transferred, et al). Debtors looking for debt-forgiveness, were a particularly fruitful source. Slaves were sometimes used. Training was on the job. Operational sailing circa 1800, wasn't particularly sophisticated. It was danger-prone. ^https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1044940/Diary-18th-century-sailor-provides-fascinating-insight-life-decks-Nelsons-navy.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1044940/Diary-18th-...
  - hgomersall 2y ago
    Sailing circa 1800 was certainly danger prone, but it was also very sophisticated. Manoeuvring a three mast ship of the line takes multiple synchronised actions involving hundreds of men, at least a significant fraction of whom need to know what they are doing. This is an interesting read on the general question of manning the Royal Navy in the Napoleonic era: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:a2cf9a3d-daf2-446b-88c8-41a0bd86f10b/files/m05c79fc6f11c37ab16be9f3775df5e7a https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:a2cf9a3d-daf2-446b-88c8-41...
    - Supermancho 2y ago
      > Manoeuvring a three mast ship of the line takes multiple synchronised actions involving hundreds of men, at least a significant fraction of whom need to know what they are doing. They needed to know how to do relatively straightforward tasks (many of which were unpleasant) when directed. Same as any other structured military force or industrial line. It was not sophisticated for the vast majority of sailors. Skills varied to be sure. Debating soft terms like skillful, sophistication, and value will not definitively answer the question of a calculation. We look to other signals, like culture. The culture was such that the ships (including weaponry and anything else worth salvage) were more valuable than manpower by virtue of the historical figure sentiments. I have not seen a compelling contradiction.

Someone 2y ago

> When a ship sinks, the outcome is more or less the same whether people are onboard or not: in either case the ship will sink The more difficult question is when a ship is on the brink of sinking. Then, having people on board can make a difference: the extra weight can make it sink, or actions by those people (pumping, plugging holes, closing doors) can prevent it from sinking. For the captain, the difficult thing is to figure out whether a ship is destined to sink or not.