Good day to you, I'm David Sklansky...

Lafortezza

Over on the 2+2 forums David Sklansky has given up responding to poker theory questions and has recently been posting alot of Ethics and Religious questions and opinions. He may be a poker genius but he's also a bit of a nutter.

Question 1: Is it OK to kill 100 random people to save the lives of 1000 random people? What about if to save the 1000 lives it was necessary to pick the 100 randomly from a specific group such as Jews or blacks or the residents of Manchester? What about if the killing of 100 results in only a 30% chance of saving 1000?


Question 2: You are brought at gunpoint into a laboratory where you will be forced to choose which of two rooms will have those in it killed painlessly. If you refuse they all will be, so let's not even contemplate that option.

In one room is a very elderly person you have never met. In the other is your devoted three year old collie. Can sparing your collie be justifed by any respected philosophies? What about any respected religions?


Question 3: Let's say you are one of those extreme conservative types who believe it is totally ethical to not share any wealth you may have with someone less fortunate. Even though there is absolutely no justification for that disparity in wealth. You are a lazy bum type who won the lottery. The fellow who is asking for a dollar is a wonderful father, well educated, but was born with a physical disability that keeps him from getting a job.

After you have turned him down with a lecture on politics, is it unethical for him to non violently pick your pocket?


Question 4: An American General needs to pick some soldiers randomly to accomplish a mission. The mission will definitely be accomplished regardless of the number he chooses. But if he chooses only one soldier he will definitely die. (I'm wondering if American generals are even allowed to order someone to sure death, when it is not in incredibly dire circumstances.)

If he chooses two soldiers, there is a 60% chance that they will both die. Otherwise they both live.

If he chooses ten soldiers, there is a 20% chance they will all die. Otherwise they will all live.

If he chooses 100 soldiers, there is a 3% chance they will all die. Otherwise they will all live.

If he doesn't do the mission, seven random soldiers will die.

These are his only choices. The question of course is what should he do. The EV answer is of course to pick one soldier. But some would object to the certainty of death. To them I ask if you would pick the one soldier if his chances of dying was 98%. Another reason to not use pure EV is that you consider deaths to not be bad in a linear way. 100 deaths isn't ten times as bad as ten deaths. If so you would pick the 100 soldiers. But is it OK for a General to think that way? (I'm assuming that he is NOT considering the morale of his men which could translate into lives saved down the road if he chose the path that was least likely to result in a fatality.)



And finally one more post by Mr. Sklansky regarding what "makes life worth living" :
Another pet peeve of mine are people who throw around ridiculous comments about how certain scenarios would make life not worth living (or alternatively how the abscence of those scenarios is what makes life worth living).

"The unexamined life is not worth living"

"What use is life without 'meaning'"?

"We must support the fine arts in this community because it is those things that make life worth living"

"We must outlaw necrophilia contracts even if the money can be used to save many lives because if we give up our dignity, life is not worth living. Ditto if we analyse all decisons with a cost benefit analysis."

Now I fully agree that examining our lives, having a ballet in our city, maintaining dignity, finding meaning, and allowing irrational emotions to sometimes take over, are worthwile endeavors.

And I am willing to assume that the people who say that the stuff about what makes life worth living are exaggerating. They wouldn't kill themselves if they lost those things.

But I maintain that the statements aren't even close to being true. Not at least for all animals, 99% of 16 year old girls, and 97% of the world in general. And most of the 3% who think they feel otherwise really don't. They are just in a place where their other need's are already taken care of, or perhaps they have lost any chance for them. In many ways we should feel sorry for these people.

Don't you think that if I offered $1,000,000 to a struggling family in Haiti to buy a member of the families future dead body for necrophilia purposes most would JOYFULLY take it. And how much would I have to pay the average person to agree to never go to an opera or an art museum?

What makes life worth living is, as the Declaration of Independence implies, The Pursuit of Happiness. (Not always short term happiness though since it might cut down long term happiness.) That might be watching your kids grow up, playing with a frisbee, or yes, getting lap dances. (I wonder how many of those who read my topless dancer answers to meaning of life questions, realized that I was trying to make this point.) For a rare few it is patronizing the arts, discussing philosophy, maintaining dignity, or finding meaning. Fine. Whatever flicks your bic. But that stuff means little or nothing to dolphins, struggling parents, or even the great majority of well off, happy people. And there is no intrinsic reason it should.

karlh

1. Call
2. Call
3. Fold
4. Raise

bohsman

nh

DeVore

lol....



Interesting questions. Not easy ones to answer either. Where on 2+2 could I find that thread?

Why do you say he's a nutter? I agree with him. Far far far too many people simply slog through their one and only life, effectively "asleep". They dont ask the questions like "why am I doing this? Is this really what I want to do for all of my life?"

Is this as good as it gets?

DeV.

MadsL

Is this as good as it gets?

Yes, All-in!

Lafortezza

David Sklansky wrote:

Don't you think that if I offered $1,000,000 to a struggling family in Haiti to buy a member of the families future dead body for necrophilia purposes most would JOYFULLY take it. And how much would I have to pay the average person to agree to never go to an opera or an art museum?

David Sklansky necrophilia

Lafortezza

If you go to the 2+2 forums, the science/philosophy forum is about 2/3 the way down the list of forums on the left side of the page.