::  Posts  ::  RSS  ::  ◂◂RSS  ::  Contact

All vs Most

June 28th, 2012
giving  [html]

Problems with the potential to kill huge numbers of people are a favorite in fiction. I think this is because on that scale everything else is unimportant. [1] Why should the protagonist be spending all their time undermining the evil scientist, ignoring all the duties of the ordinary life they left behind? Because billions of lives are at stake! Why should we be willing to spend money like acorns to send a spaceship out to destroy that incoming asteroid? Because it would end life on earth!

One thing they tend not to distinguish, however, is whether the catastrophe threatens to kill everyone or just most people. In terms of how many people die, things that kill 90% of people vs 100% are much more similar than different. But anything humanity can't recover from is very much worse: it removes the possibility of future people getting to live. [2] I find plagues and bioterrorism really worrying, but at least they're very unlikely to kill everyone.


[1] Except love. The author can make a romance much stronger by having the protagonist make a choice where they value the love interest more than saving the world. Of course the world still gets saved, potentially by the two of them working together.

[2] If there might be a lot of future people this is really bad, but even if we're just talking about a eliminating the earth's steady state population that's a lot of people-time missed out on.

Comment via: google plus, facebook

Recent posts on blogs I like:

How Fast New York Regional Rail Could Be Part 2

In my last post about New York regional rail schedules, I covered the New Haven and Harlem Lines of Metro-North and the Main Line and Hempstead Branch of the LIRR. I was hoping to cover more lines tonight, but due to time constraints only the Hudson Line …

via Pedestrian Observations October 17, 2019

Strong stances

I. The question of confidence Should one hold strong opinions? Some say yes. Some say that while it’s hard to tell, it tentatively seems pretty bad (probably). There are many pragmatically great upsides, and a couple of arguably unconscionable downsides. …

via Meteuphoric October 15, 2019

What do executives do, anyway?

An executive with 8,000 indirect reports and 2000 hours of work in a year can afford to spend, at most, 15 minutes per year per person in their reporting hierarchy... even if they work on nothing else. That job seems impossible. How can anyone make any im…

via apenwarr September 29, 2019

more     (via openring)

More Posts:


  ::  Posts  ::  RSS  ::  ◂◂RSS  ::  Contact