11–20 of 142 posts
I take objection to this line: > When I share this story with other sailors, they are universally aghast that we helped these refugees. I wonder what kind of sailors they are conversing with, if at all.
I take objection to this line: > When I share this story with other sailors, they are universally aghast that we helped these refugees. I wonder what kind of sailors they are conversing with, if at all.
I found that more than a little odd. Sailors are universally out to help other seafarers and hope for help themselves when they need it. This was the guys first blue water trip, I guess he wasnt a true sailor yet, and hadn't lived life abord for long enough to adopt the culture.
Additionally it is also the law and international convention.
https://www.bullivant.com/rescue-at-sea/
“Every master is bound, so far as he can do so without serious danger to his vessel and persons thereon, to render assistance to any person in danger of being lost at sea.”
I take objection to this line: > When I share this story with other sailors, they are universally aghast that we helped these refugees. I wonder what kind of sailors they are conversing with, if at all.
> The prevailing wisdom for this seafaring situation is “Don’t Stop.”
The law is to render assistance. That law was based on prevailing wisdom.
Apparently the author moves in different circles to the rest of seafaring folk.
I see a problem with risking everything that is if your goal is to either make it to the top or make it to the bottom, then risking it all is the way to go. Yet, that’s a poor long-term strategy. Eventually risk will realize and you’ll lose it all.
I see a problem with risking everything that is if your goal is to either make it to the top or make it to the bottom, then risking it all is the way to go. Yet, that’s a poor long-term strategy. Eventually risk will realize and you’ll lose it all.
Your statement sort of assumes the worst case has negative infinity utility. Which, granted, is usually how economists model human behaviour, but perhaps not how humans behave in practise. (If death truly had negative infinity utility, it would overpower the benefit of everything and we couldn't do anything.)
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’Being a good human is important. Helping someone without being involved in (aside from sustaining them) is noble as well.
Not every problem in this world needs a solution, those seeking will or will not find their solution. If in a position to help them humanitarianly, do so. Don't set expectations or guidance, resolve a need. Unless you have other extraordinary means.
I see a problem with risking everything that is if your goal is to either make it to the top or make it to the bottom, then risking it all is the way to go. Yet, that’s a poor long-term strategy. Eventually risk will realize and you’ll lose it all.
Your statement sort of assumes the worst case has negative infinity utility. Which, granted, is usually how economists model human behaviour, but perhaps not how humans behave in practise. (If death truly had negative infinity utility, it would overpower the benefit of everything and we couldn't do anything.)
This reads like a dystopian horror novel exploring the extremes of a deranged entrepreneur's mind.