Children have low utility. in The Napkin.
- April 15, 2015, 6:56 a.m.
- |
- Public
So, I was watching Star Trek: The Animated Series while eating my cereal. Specifically, the episode “One of Our Planets Is Missing.” There’s some massive space-cloud devouring planets. Kirk warns the governor of a nearby planet to evacuate what little he can.
The governor says he can save only 2000 children out of some millions of people.
Something about this bugs me on a basic logical level. So your entire planet is going to be wiped out and you’re going to rebuild your society with a bunch of kids? Who is going to instruct them? Who is going to build things? Who is going to make food? If you’re saving more or less 2000 children, it’s a fair bet that in 5 years, your population is going to be around 2000.
On the other hand, if you “saved” 1000 couples in their twenties, your population in five years could be upwards of 5000.
Don’t know, I can hear Spock saying, “Captain, it is illogical to save the children.” And then Bones shouting, “ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR VULCAN MIND.”
Fawkes Gal ⋅ April 17, 2015
Yeah saving nothing but children doesn't make any sense at all. We don't carry much instinctual knowledge, we need to learn by being taught from others.