"What if ..?"

[mafiajoe]

In an air share, you reach a point on the exit where you know you normally use 500 psi to exit on your best day and there is 200 left in the tanks and a difficult restriction ahead, or whatever would make you certain both of you aren't going to make it. You are 100% certain, and not only are you 100% certain, you are 100% correct. You may not even make it and it would take all of your skill, all of your tricks, all of your experience, and to make it out would be a miracle in itself at this point, but you are good enough, that maybe you just might, but in that air share there is absolutely no way. It's not Ginnie. It's not a popular cave. It's in the Bahamas. You know the only three cave divers on that island and they are not planning to go diving that day. Are you really a coward? Are you cutting and running?

Thanks for this bit Trace,that's exactly how I interpreted your first post,hence my reply.
I'm gonna tell a story that really happened here a couple of months ago.....but not now,I have to go to the dentist...damn
and I'm not going into that theological-metaphisical debate,we can go on rambling for ages without getting anywhere...and I'm a lazy bugger

 

[ScubaSteve]

So I've been responding to your OP as if there is still hope for survival.

As I think many have. Until the last breath of air comes from the tank, there is still hope (in some minds that is). If you already know there is zero chance of another diver, or a quicker escape then you are already dead or have already given up hope. I am not measuring cowardice or courage. Some people believe that they would continue to aid their buddy holding on to hope that another diver would show up or that they would actually be closer to the exit than we thought or any other miracle that would help us to get out alive. Anything is possible no matter how unlikely. I do not see this as cowardice or courage. I see it as a diver taking responsibility as they see fit. If someone sees their responsibility differently, then I would simply like to know about it before we get in the water. I do not plan on ever needing my buddy to rescue me but as I said before, anything is possible. However, if that day ever comes, I just hope I am diving with someone who is not planning on looking me in the eyes as I die.

 

[Sas]

I just hope I am diving with someone who is not planning on looking me in the eyes as I die.

I think if someone leaves you behind, they aren't going to stick around, look you in the eyes and watch you die. You might endanger them as you might not go down without a fight.

I think people like you and Doc Harry need to focus on the actual question. There is no hope that both of you can get out, the question doesn't allow for it. If you choose to stay back and die along with your buddy, or give them your air, then answer that directly but the question involves you either dying with or without your buddy, or you living and your buddy dying. Ignore the rest about hope, etc, it's not part of the question. If you have hope in a situation like this that you'll both get out, you are delusional, which is not a good thing to be.

I suspect this attitude is why there are sometimes two casualties when there might only needed to have been one. I don't see people like that as heros, but wasteful. If I had a buddy say they would stay back with me in a situation like this I'd tell them not to be a moron but I'd also warn them that if I think I am going to die and their air might keep me alive, there is no knowing what I would do (and most people would be in the same position, you don't know you won't turn into a crazy gibbering mess when faced with death unless it happens).

People often do not give up hope at all even when there is no doubt that their actions would kill them and that not a good thing. Not putting yourself in danger is a basic part of my dive and first aid training.

 

[Sas]

That's really kind of interesting, Thal. One would think that a scientist wouldn't choose a side until there was either 100% scientific proof supporting intelligent design or 100% scientific proof supporting that no intelligence could possibly have designed the universe.

Just because there is no proof for something doesn't mean the likelihood of either it existing or not existing is the same. Your example of intelligent design is a very poor example to illustrate your point (abiogenesis would have been better, for future reference) but yea, I'm really not going to go there in this thread.

A believer states there definately is something
An atheist states there definately isn't

A mostly incorrect statement - too superficial a definition. As an atheist I think the probability of God... and invisible unicorns, is low, low enough to be ignored unless evidence is presented to the contrary, but I would never say there 'definitely isn't a God' unless it was definitively disproven (unlikely). Atheism is an absence of belief in some cases, or in other cases an active disbelief. It can have two meanings, as does agnostic (someone who is doubtful versus someone who thinks God is unknowable).

The rest of your comments about whether or not Neptune existed before the telescope and so on, well that starts to go into the philosophical world, not just the scientific world. There are multiple philosophical schools of thought on existence and reality and I'm too lazy to go into them on this thread. Not that I could do any of them justice anyway

 

[ScubaSteve]

And perhaps you will not be happy until everybody say that they would leave their buddy behind. For the record, Trace DID state that it would be very easy to do that in an effort to convince the dying buddy that you were out of air as well so that they would not fight.

There is no hope.....

How do you know that? I think that that statement right there speaks to the difference in people. HOPE is something that a person either believes in or not....I do not personally see it as a religious view. It is the feeling that their might be another diver just around the corner to get air from. In this situation, I reall could care less what you call it since you seem to have some issues, but I have said and will say again I do not believe I would leave my buddy behind because I would hold hope that while there is air in my tank for us to breathe, there is a hope that we will make it to another source of air. Change the word HOPE to whatever word you will not get stuck on.

 

[Sas]

And perhaps you will not be happy until everybody say that they would leave their buddy behind. For the record, Trace DID state that it would be very easy to do that in an effort to convince the dying buddy that you were out of air as well so that they would not fight.

No, that is not what I'm after. I just prefer people not to skirt constantly around the actual question and actually say 'I will leave my buddy behind' OR 'I will give my buddy my gas, stay back and die' OR 'I will stay with my buddy and we will both die together'. It's really very simple. I've seen this question (using different examples) come up multiple times, not just on this forum, and some people just cannot address it. Actually quite interesting to see the ways in which people will continually bring up 'well I'd be hopeful' when the question does not allow the possibility of you both getting out of there alive. It's a hypothetical - address it how it has been framed.

How do you know that?

Because the question says you only have enough gas for one, and this has been clarified a number of times. In an actual situation, it might be less certain but this is a hypothetical example.

I think that that statement right there speaks to the difference in people. HOPE is something that a person either believes in or not....

Of course, not something needed to be said.

I do not personally see it as a religious view.

Agreed. But religion might form part of someone's motivations, as might other aspects of their life such as previous experiences and so forth.

It is the feeling that their might be another diver just around the corner to get air from.

In some situations this would be a stupid thing to feel as it would not happen.

In this situation, I reall could care less what you call it since you seem to have some issues, but I have said and will say again I do not believe I would leave my buddy behind because I would hold hope that while there is air in my tank for us to breathe, there is a hope that we will make it to another source of air. Change the word HOPE to whatever word you will not get stuck on.

Hope is the only thing I am stuck on in your example, and there is no way around this. If you choose to stay with them, you are choosing to die with them, as simple as that. If you would choose to die with your buddy, rather than get one of you out alive, why do you just not say that? And explain why you think it is better that both of you die, rather than one of you get out alive?

 

[DCBC]

Many of us believe in things that are not proven. In Science it may be the difference between a law and a theory.

Most of us believe in gravity; yet it is not a scientific law, only theory. Perhaps the Scientists may wish to weigh in on this...

While there busy with trying to recall Einstein's mathematical tensors, they can explain why gravity totally fails to explain why Saturn has rings and Jupiter doesn't, or why the theory of gravity contradicts the second law of thermodynamics.

There are many things that we don't know and may never know as a species. Perhaps we should use more time understanding the word "humble." :mooner:

 

[mafiajoe]

I'm gonna tell a story that really happened here a couple of months ago.....

So,it was actually last October.It's a classic.Three guys,all experienced divers,two were instructors,one a geologists,went diving a cave not far from here.They wanted to get some specimens of rock so they carried some tools with them.
I have dived some of those caves but not that particular one,so the description I'm giving is the one told me by other divers.It's all at a depth of 20m. there's a first big chamber and a tunnel that reaches another smaller,but not tiny,chamber.Altogether,from the entrance to the second chamber,is about 50m.
They all entered the second chamber,did whatever they needed to do and proceeded to the exit,retrieving the line.Reaching the exit the first,most experienced diver,the geologist,realized that he had forgotten some tools in the furthest chamber,"told" the other guys to wait for him and apparently with less than half of his gas remaining swam in again.With no line.It was just less than 50 meters straight, at a depth of 20m. after all:in,grab the tools and back.
The other two guys at the entrance waited....and waited...and waited....At this point it was certain that things weren't exactly right.The other instructor "told" the other guy to wait and with the little air left in his tank swam in too.
Result:the firebrigade divers had to wait two full days for the silt to settle down in order,with not little effort,to be able to retrieve the bodies.
Apparently,as I said,you can reach that second chamber thru a single tunnel,but once in you turn around and see another tunnel entrance:that's a cul the sac!

The first guy to go back in screwed it all up,but the second guy screwed it all up big time!
End of the story.

 

[DaleC]

Sas, Thal, Lamont and others. I was thinking about my post last night and wanted to make clear that it is not my intention to argue that someone has the right to consider themselves whatever they wish. I just find the notion of atheism to be an interesting choice and like to question it (in general terms). I have met many people who have struggled to come to some understanding (many with very strong experiential/mental/emotional roadblocks) and the topic comes up. I understand the motivation for belief, I understand the motivation for agnosticism but I do not understand the motivation for staunch atheism.

BTW my example were not philosophical. I was quite careful to ensure they were grounded in real observable situations and concepts that one can easily contemplate though I see you did not. Refering to the belief in god being like the belief in unicorns is a (not to subtle) attempt to ridicule the belief.

Maybe our "questioning" is the most beautiful thing about being human. Perhaps a "god" knows that and resists providing proof because it knows that would ruin us. After all, the best teachers are not those that provide the answers but rather those that teach us how to think. How many atheists really would want proof of higher existance in consideration of what they would lose by finding it?

 

[Walter]

Uh, Jupiter does have rings.