THE_IRON_...KENYAN?
Banned deucer.
arent there already a googolplex of mexicans in texas already
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Specks versus torture
- Thread starter capefeather
- Start date
- Status
TheValkyries
proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
What's the difference, in all honesty?
DURKA DUR
I have been thinking about this.
Because googleplex is such a stupidly large number, you likely are going to have a situation where probably millions, if not billions of people, as subjected to the dust in such a way that they are inflicted with pain for 50 years similar to that of torture.
So logically that would be the answer. However there does make the moral problem of you having to torture that one guy. IMO its kind of like a situation where if you kill someone, you can prevent a hurricane. Logically more people will die from the hurricane, but then again, you aren't personally choosing to kill them.
Because googleplex is such a stupidly large number, you likely are going to have a situation where probably millions, if not billions of people, as subjected to the dust in such a way that they are inflicted with pain for 50 years similar to that of torture.
So logically that would be the answer. However there does make the moral problem of you having to torture that one guy. IMO its kind of like a situation where if you kill someone, you can prevent a hurricane. Logically more people will die from the hurricane, but then again, you aren't personally choosing to kill them.
VKCA
(Virtual Circus Kareoky Act)
it'd be a lot more than a billion son, like, a billion is 10 to the power of 9
a googolplex is 10 to the power of 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
there would be many many more people than are currently on earth in life threatening situations
a googolplex is 10 to the power of 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
there would be many many more people than are currently on earth in life threatening situations
this is a really good post, post more please
Last edited:
I disagree, I think the specs are the logical solution. Let me remove morals from the equation. You are offered a cosmic choice: you can experience the worst pain imaginable for 5 minutes, or you can experience that pain spread out in brief moments of slight discomfort in your finger for the rest of your life, plus one extra moment. The second option is more pain (that extra moment) but I feel like most everyone would choose it. The pro torture group are looking at pain in a unit describing the quantitative amount of pain. To clarify, this unit corresponds directly to the amount of pain experienced. When looking at the question like that, the specs cause more quantitative pain. But (even accounting for morals, which shouldn't be considered) that is not a fair representation of how pain really affects people. Pain becomes worse the more concentrated it is. It doesn't matter that you experience more pain drawing out your torture, it'd take a lot of extra pain for me to consider the 5 minutes of concentrated pain. So by choosing specks, the affect of your pain is much less because you spread it out, which is honestly the most realistic way to look at this.
But you see googleplex, because of its sheer numerical weight, kind of circumvents that. The pain is much more than spread out, as there is the very real chance that terrible things can happen to it. Even if there is a 1 in a trillion chance that dust in your eyes make your have a debilitating pain for your whole life, because of googleplex, there are almost countless billions of people now effected by it, if not more.
Okay yeah but that's not really the point of the exercise. As mentioned before, the generalized dilemma illustrated is "small pain for many people" or "big pain for few people". Going further into detail with this hypothetical doesn't really address the real meat of the matter.
Also I think the use of trillions and billions to describe the number of people suffering is wayyy missing the mark of scale here, and part of the reason why this question seems so unanimously decided as "dude, it's definitely the specks" is because we can't really properly conceptualize just how big a googolplex is.
Also I think the use of trillions and billions to describe the number of people suffering is wayyy missing the mark of scale here, and part of the reason why this question seems so unanimously decided as "dude, it's definitely the specks" is because we can't really properly conceptualize just how big a googolplex is.
I understand what a googolplex is and why it's totally pointless to apply it to people
I don't think you guys understand what diminishing returns are
I don't think you guys understand what diminishing returns are
Both
To say that the slight pain from the specks might cause some people to trip over and accidentally set off a nuke or whatever (small chance of that happening but a googolplex is pretty big) is to miss the point of the thought exercise. It's an arbitrarily high amount of people experiencing a miniscule amount of pain balanced against the one guy experience a lot of pain.
I guess I'll give a serious answer with regards to utilitarianism or whatever. Firstly, I'd say that the pain of getting specks in your eye should probably be rounded down to pretty much zero, anyway. Secondly, this is assuming we're measuring negative utility. If we're aiming to optimize pleasure instead of minimize pain it becomes a lot easier to answer: Specks option means that a googolplex of people experience minor pain, brush that off almost instantly and then go on with their life while Torture option means that one person's life is ruined and they experience little pleasure for 50 years.
But anyway, I too would like to hear capefeather's opinion on the matter. Then I can stop being serious and go back to "herp derp Infinite Shin Kicks LOL."
I guess I'll give a serious answer with regards to utilitarianism or whatever. Firstly, I'd say that the pain of getting specks in your eye should probably be rounded down to pretty much zero, anyway. Secondly, this is assuming we're measuring negative utility. If we're aiming to optimize pleasure instead of minimize pain it becomes a lot easier to answer: Specks option means that a googolplex of people experience minor pain, brush that off almost instantly and then go on with their life while Torture option means that one person's life is ruined and they experience little pleasure for 50 years.
But anyway, I too would like to hear capefeather's opinion on the matter. Then I can stop being serious and go back to "herp derp Infinite Shin Kicks LOL."
If we were to ask ourselves "Would I want to be the person tortured for 50 years?" most of us would probably answer "no" (or something to that effect involving the use of expletives). If we were to also ask each person in turn, then the majority answer would most likely be no. Therefore, we conclude that the only reasonable solution would be "Specks" since being able to choose a person defeats the purpose of the experiment*.
But I dislike this way of looking at things. Another way of thinking about this is to imagine that we have a complex problem. It would take a person their entire lifetime to solve, but as we add more and more people the time taken can be reduced. Assuming that the problem is solvable, clearly the latter is preferred, as even with diminishing returns, if we add enough people (say a googolplex) then the problem can be solved with a minimal amount of time.
But I dislike this way of looking at things. Another way of thinking about this is to imagine that we have a complex problem. It would take a person their entire lifetime to solve, but as we add more and more people the time taken can be reduced. Assuming that the problem is solvable, clearly the latter is preferred, as even with diminishing returns, if we add enough people (say a googolplex) then the problem can be solved with a minimal amount of time.
otherwise we could just choose the people that said yes. also, if the majority answer was yes then this wouldn't be a problem in the first place.
If we were to ask ourselves "Would I want to be one of the people with specks in their eyes", most of us would probably answer "no" (or something to that effect involving the use of expletives). If we were to also ask each person in turn, then the majority answer would most likely be no. Therefore, we conclude that the only reasonable solution would be "torture" since being able to choose the googleplex of people defeats the purpose of the experiment.
How do you know that? If it was going to prevent a person from being tortured, I'd answer yes, just like any every decent human being.
why are you so judgemental anyway :c
having specks in ur eyes sucks
blitzlefan
shake it off!
Guys, are you kidding me? A speck in your eye hurts for about 0.2 seconds, and then you go on with your life. As if you don't get sand or dust in your eye every once in awhile. Torture for 50 years fucks one person up and basically ruins their entire life. I honestly don't understand where a lot of arguments are coming from, and I'm pretty sure it's just for the sake of prolonging the thread or something idk. The question isn't about the possible side effects of people getting shit in their eye and getting in car crashes. That's completely irrelevant to the thought experiment.
The question, in the way I'm interpreting it, is would you rather have x amount of pain spread across a googolplex of people or just one?
A speck in your eye is basically no pain (unless you're a huge wimp), so even when it's across a huge number of people, it's not a big deal. To me, it's like would you rather have a particle of sand thrown at a googolplex people or smash one guy with a boulder?
@ below
Hooray, a trollsy (unfunny) shitpost! :)
The question, in the way I'm interpreting it, is would you rather have x amount of pain spread across a googolplex of people or just one?
A speck in your eye is basically no pain (unless you're a huge wimp), so even when it's across a huge number of people, it's not a big deal. To me, it's like would you rather have a particle of sand thrown at a googolplex people or smash one guy with a boulder?
@ below
Hooray, a trollsy (unfunny) shitpost! :)
Last edited:
If you could save a googleplex of people from having the discomfort of having specks in their eyes, wouldn't you be willing to have yourself tortured for 50 years?
C'mon, think. What would jesus do?
A googleplex is a large number, probably more than the amount of people who will ever live, and you're causing all of them an unneccesary discomfort because you don't want someone to just take the hit and get tortured
C'mon, think. What would jesus do?
A googleplex is a large number, probably more than the amount of people who will ever live, and you're causing all of them an unneccesary discomfort because you don't want someone to just take the hit and get tortured
Last edited:
To reference my own post, would you rather get tortured by unbearable pain for a few minutes, or put up with a slight daily discomfort for the rest of your life? Morals aside, the specs are objectively less bad.
As long as I'm not left with a scar shaped like a penis or something I'd most likely choose the torture.
Really, the worst torture imaginable for several minutes just to not have a brief, momentary, daily discomfort? I mean if that's really what you would pick then okay, but it just boggles my mind that someone would choose mind shattering pain over something they'll barely notice.
- Status