3 ms·
I like to think of it backwards; If I knew that I had a contribution to make to humanity as great as Einstein's, would I willingly sacrifice my relationship wit
by noonespecial 14y ago
I like to think of it backwards; If I knew that I had a contribution to make to humanity as great as Einstein's, would I willingly sacrifice my relationship with my family to make it?
- pfortuny 14y agoI hope I would not. The future is irrelevant because unknown in the face of a single present person.
- jacquesm 14y agoThat's an extremely difficult moral problem. It's akin to asking yourself if you would rather rescue the child on the left or the 3 people on the right when given the choice. And then with various permutations for the child being yours or a stranger and/or the people on the right being your parents and / or strangers. We are not well equipped to make such decisions.
- aufreak3 14y agoIt is a tough moral problem, but one that societies of old have recognized and formalized. For example, most all religions have some formal structure where a person with a "higher calling" can take up a monkhood of some sort. Formal induction into monkhood made their severance from family ties public and contractual, much as the formal wedding ceremony publicizes a man-woman relationship. We just don't have a socially accepted notion of "scientific monkhood" yet I suppose.
- intended 14y agoWell, the stereotype of the absent minded professor has existed for a long time now, as well as the hermit inventor/philosopher. Perhaps not monkhood, but as an eccentric removing himself from society is a common occurrence. And for sufficiently levels of ability and talent, people are willing to forgo social convention. I forget who it was, but one of the great ones long gone was extremely uncomfortable around people. To the extent that people were told that they should casually walk up to him, and without addressing him directly, talk to the air about the problem they were facing or had come up with.
- philwelch 14y agoFor some, like Mendel, regular monkhood did the job.
- theorique 14y agoEasy answer. If it's my child or someone I know, save him/her. If they are all strangers, save the greater number. If I know both the child and one or more people among the set of 3, prioritize based on genetic or family proximity. The point is, this can be solved algorithmically and/or game theoretically.
- jacquesm 14y agoAsk a mother.
- theorique 14y agoSave her child?
- dharmach 14y agoAdd race/nationality/religion/culture and see if your algorithm changes.
- theorique 14y agoWell, people probably skew toward people "like them", broadly speaking. But it would be interesting to run the experiment in a psychology lab and see what kind of results arise.