Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

launiusr.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 171 posts

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#131

Post by chris_wot »

genwin wrote: post #122
7952 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the injustice of that bother you? You are given the power to weigh up life and death, without any chance of ever starving yourself. Such naval gazing is stereotypical of people with full stomachs. Is basic human empathy such a bad reason to try and help?

> Is basic human empathy such a bad reason to try and help? If the help does more harm than good in the long run, then obviously yes. Whether a particular course of action does more harm than good is open to debate.

I wonder what you would say if you were that starving child? Would you feel it is best to just die from lack of food because of the long term benefits of doing so?

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#132

Post by chris_wot »

kingkawn wrote: post #29
jxcole wrote: post #9

I don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then these adults would have children of their own. The…

Which child will grow up to revolutionize their nation's politics?

That question presupposes that the only people it is worthwhile to save from starvation is the one who grows up to make a large impact on their country. It's the sort of logic that I find very dangerous.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#133

Post by chris_wot »

jmah wrote: post #74
fragsworth wrote: post #68

This guy has incredible tact, and knows his audience well. > Ever since this picture was first published, voices have become louder and louder warning of the grave problems that confront man in our times: pollution, hunger, poverty, urban living, food production, water control, overpopulation. He even took care not to mention climate change, which I assume was in case the reader has a strong bias against it.

I'm not sure climate change was particularly well-known in 1970.

Not true. While not as widely known, it was still causing concern amongst scientists. Wikipedia is particularly helpful here: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_scien...

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#134

Post by rimantas »

chris_wot wrote: post #131
genwin wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is basic human empathy such a bad reason to try and help? If the help does more harm than good in the long run, then obviously yes. Whether a particular course of action does more harm than good is open to debate.

I wonder what you would say if you were that starving child? Would you feel it is best to just die from lack of food because of the long term benefits of doing so?

You don't get. That's the problem: free food does not solve the starving child problem. It just creates more starving children.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#135

Post by chris_wot »

rimantas wrote: post #134
chris_wot wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what you would say if you were that starving child? Would you feel it is best to just die from lack of food because of the long term benefits of doing so?

You don't get. That's the problem: free food does not solve the starving child problem. It just creates more starving children.

That's a fallacy. "Free food" does not create more starving children. Whilst some famines are caused by over-population, it is far more likely that they are caused by other factors such as genocide campaigns, civil wars, refugee flows and episodes of extreme violence and state collapse.

Of course, if your solution to the "starving children" problem is to let them die of starvation, then you indeed have a final solution. And what a solution!

I am interested in where you are coming from. Personally, I would hate to look a starving child in the eye and deny them food to keep them alive. I would hate to look their parents in the eye and tell them that because they have four children that they aren't worthwhile keeping alive and they should drop dead from malnutrition.

So I do get it. My question remains the same - what would you say to a starving child? Or their parents as the child lay dying?

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#136

Post by roel_v »

drucken wrote: post #14
mseebach wrote: post #11

So the argument that research for the sake of research is worthwhile is perfectly sound, the condescending "let me explain to you how a budget works" and "it's not my decision to spend the money" parts certainly rubs me the wrong way.

How on Earth is that condescending? How is a nun in middle of Africa meant to have even a basic understanding of how a specific government's budgeting and economic system works? I am willing to bet the vast majority of Americans themselves (to this day) have no idea of even the basics so simply explained by Dr Stuhlinger, yet it was a critical part of the bigger picture.

Because the obvious response to 'how the budget works' is 'well then change the way the budget works'. I'm not sure if it's 'condescending' per se, but it did take away from the power of the letter.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#137

Post by roel_v »

malkia wrote: post #104

"You may ask now whether I personally would be in favor of such a move by our government. My answer is an emphatic yes. Indeed, I would not mind at all if my annual taxes were increased by a number of dollars for the purpose of feeding hungry children, wherever they may live." Amen to that.

Spending more dollars does not feed starving children. Hunger is not a problem that is caused by a lack of food, we have plenty and also plenty of resource to feed every living person. Hunger is a political problem, caused by corrupt, malfunctioning government, or no government at all.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#138

Post by JEVLON »

dmlorenzetti wrote: post #18
jxcole wrote: post #9

I don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then these adults would have children of their own. The…

When Bill Gates' wife began pushing him to work on issues of third-world health, this was more or less his argument against it. She dug up the statistics to show that this idea, while intuitive, is not supported by fact. As health improves-- and in particular as child mortality goes down-- birth rates fall accordingly. As we all know, Gates got on board, and now funds a lot of health research and on-the-ground initia…

Melinda Gates seems to support the idea of birth control in Africa.

http://www.ted.com/talks/melinda_gates_let_s_put_birth_contr...

Edits: She doesn't want it for population control.

By empowering women to decide whether or not they want to have children, it will still significantly reduce the birth rate.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#139

Post by gaius »

joering2 wrote: post #49
RandallBrown wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike other mars rovers, Curiousity isn't solar powered. It's nuclear powered. RTGs ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen... ) are not new, but I have no doubt that plenty of refinements went into the process to make this one better and more efficient. Now what if this is the next fuel source for cars? We could dramatically cut down on our use of fossil fuels. That's pretty world changing. T…

Great read, thanks Randall! [+1]. Interesting points, but I don't believe in next 100 years we will be able to live on Mars, or there will be enough justification to move there and spend trillion to pursue that vision (of course this mission only gets us closer). Not only its still extremely expensive to fly there, further the only way to live there is under the shelter, which would cost hundreds of times more than b…

Well the instant someone invents the fusion reactor, all that HE3 on the moon is going to be worth mining...

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#140

Post by rehack »

pooriaazimi wrote: post #42
jxcole wrote: post #9

I don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then these adults would have children of their own. The…

I'm on the same boat. Which is why I believe anyone who (in an ideal world) is seriously seeking to change the state of life in those poor countries should spend their money on creating jobs and "factories". By factory I don't mean silicon factories, but basic needs of those people, be it hospitals or modern agricultural facilities. But, sadly, in reality that can't happen. If you want to create jobs, you first need…

Well thanks for the informative read. I don't agree with you that the rest of the site is garbage. Here is another good story I found there:

http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/51874

This one is of Miranda Gibson, who is a tree hugger sitting on top of the tree for 7 months, at a height of 60 meters. Her aim is to protect the felling of a forest around Tasmania.

Update: I do wonder on the juxtaposition of this mini story in the context of the OP's story (which makes a lot of sense to me BTW). So I don't know whether the answer lies in all of us pursuing our own extremes (e.g. Mars exploration on one hand and saving the the forest on the other hand). The latter extreme, of saving a forest - is it in some way similar to the view point the Nun was taking when she wrote that letter?

Post reply on HN