What would you do? Part 1

Did you watch "Heathers" again last night or something?

I used to love these kind of hypotheticals in college. really make you think about stuff. My picks are:

first year med student

phD in cell biology

policeman

olympic athlete (make it a woman)

pregnant woman

My thinking is that the survival of humanity is the goal above all others, no matter the cost. The philosophy that I take is that the men will impregnate the women. I'm a guy and so is the policeman and phD. That leaves three potential mothers (plus another if the pregnant womans child is a girl - might have to wait 12 or 13 years on that one).

the policeman was chosen over all others as he would be armed and so can retain civil order (in this case, make sure that people co-operate in the parenting program).

Med student can take care of health. Cell biology guy can get cloning up and running in the future. Olympic athlete is fit and healthy and would make good mother and worker when not pregnant.

As for historically or now, I'd take for hot young chicks that are fertile, an engineer and a phD in cloning. I wouldn't be going. I'd sacrifice myself for the future of humanity. I'd make sure all of the chicks are up for a lot of sex (don't need the guy with the gun then). Probably try to stagger their ages. Youngest would be 14, then 16, 22 (with a major in chemistry), the youngest MD I could get and another 24 or so with a major in law, who could come up with some kind of model as to what form of government is most applicable when the population reaches a point where it is needed.

No need to pic anyone famous.

I wouldn't bother. 6 people does not represent sufficient genetic diversity to restart the human race. I would look for people who would make it possible for the group to survive, and possibly leave something behind for some other or future race of beings to find. Further, as people are generally not unidimensional, the simple descriptions above are inadequate to make a determination. For example, it might turn out that the female stripper is also quite skilled at growing organic produce, but the PhD in cell biology goes completely off his nut without his meds.

I find my analysis of these sorts of things more fun than the things themselves. Got any more?

i think in any case humanity would be doomed. I think for the all time people a great way for humanity to go out would be the following line up

Jesus

Muhammad

Budha

Lenin

Hittler (just to throw things of balance a bit).

It would make for some seriously interesting discussions before they all died (If Hittler didn't decide to wipe them out). Jesus might be the first to die as Hittler wouldn't stand him as a Jew. Muhhamad and Hittler would battle as Muhhamad would feel threatened as he is also semetic. Lenin would stamp out either of those as they are a threat to him, but wouldn't have a problem with Buddha unless he started to get preachy on him. So Buddha and Lenin would die naturally.

I would definitely keep the catholic priest far far away from the orphaned boy...

you ALWAYS choose all the females and one male. otherwise, you'd have NO shot at re-population.

jim has a point; what you'd end up with is a limited set of traits and a "species" different than we think of humans, and will continue to diverge over time, especially given the extremely small number of individuals in generation 1 (first set of offspring). very low chances of survival as a group.

i only count three confirmed females in there, and their ages do not suggest a lot of reproductive capacity (23, 27, and 30). unless you throw in some young girls (preferably of varying races to increase diversity) your hypothetical is doomed anyhow.

why even put the mentally unstable farmer or a 71-year old retiree?

It was meant to be a philosophical exercise. Kind of less obvious than a following one. the idea is that if the person chooses the policeman (as someone did) that they are open to the idea of a military dictatorship etc

Here is one (probably not what you are looking for)

You are in a group of four people. You are underwater caving (ie entering caves from underwater). Your group passes through a narrow crevice. When the tide rises the group decides that it is time to leave and the cave will sooon flood. The first member of the group to enter the crevice becomes stuck (they are overweight and only just managed to get through the first time, not a necessary condition for part one or two of problem). The party has a knife. There is no way of removing the person from the crevice alive.

a) What do you do?

b) What do you do, considering that your party are the only people left on Earth?

c) What do you do if you had warned the overweight person not to go through the crevice first for the risk of blocking it?

d) Part c) but your party are the only people on Earth.

"you ALWAYS choose all the females and one male. otherwise, you'd have NO shot at re-population"

But the point is, is society existing the main aim, or having a society that is worth existing? I like the response of the person who had Jesus and Buddha et al.

For an all time list I'd take the following (Eurocentric I know).

da Vinci

Mozart

Socrates

Einstein

Nelson Mandela (bet you didn't see that one coming)

Important Choice wrote:

"you ALWAYS choose all the females and one male. otherwise, you'd have NO shot at re-population"

But the point is, is society existing the main aim, or having a society that is worth existing? I like the response of the person who had Jesus and Buddha et al.

For an all time list I'd take the following (Eurocentric I know).

da Vinci

Mozart

Socrates

Einstein

Nelson Mandela (bet you didn't see that one coming)

five males. you'd have great conversations over dinner, but after 30 years you'd be roach food with no kin.

the question was not "who would you have to dinner?" it was "with whom would you colonize a planet when all other humans are destroyed?"

You miss my meaning. I would rather have a vibrant, wonderful society that encompasses so much of the beauty and creativity of humanity, even if it were to last for a short time, rather than some artificial created, Orwellian type society.

I reckon you'd need a good few more than six to make a repopulation viable, is likely a good few of the third generation of this group would be deformed due to the fact that the parents would most likely be closely related to each other.

There's almost no hope of perpetuating humanity (without serious defects) with only 6 people on a new planet, so I'd just take the hottest girls and have lots of sex with them. Selfish? Sure, but the race is doomed anyway, so what responsibility do I really have?

Incest wrote:

I reckon you'd need a good few more than six to make a repopulation viable, is likely a good few of the third generation of this group would be deformed due to the fact that the parents would most likely be closely related to each other.

depends on the fecundity of the females--the more you have, the better for the second generation (the founders are zero generation, their children first, etc.).

first cousins can have kids that are perfectly "normal." the cousins myth is part of a natural human tendency towards incest taboo.

the greater concern, as you stated (and i in earlier post) is that your founding population is too small.

even if the females were young, fertile, and the male virile, you'd be lucky to get 40 offspring (8 per woman). of these, a few would likely die. in addition, if one of the mothers dies, you're in trouble. finally, of those 40 offspring, ~20 are male, and therefore nearly worthless in terms of repopulating. so the growth rate, in the face of the stresses of new colonization, new environment, and lack of medical care/neonatal care, i'd still wager the colony is doomed.

greg ward is right on here. The most important thing is propagating the species. After a few hundred years man will emerge from the dark ages again and rediscover whatever was lost.

However, it would be nice to have an engineer or a cell biologist. That would certainly "speed things up" and increase the likelihood that the species would survive. A first year med student doesn't have enough knowledge to act as a doctor, but if she writes down everything she knows about the human body that would be a lot of anatomy and physiology to start out with. Plus she's a young female. She could conceivably pop out one kid per year until she's 40.

I say the ideal six are:

- female med student, 23

- olympic athlete, 25, if she's female

- winner of american idol, 18, if she's female

- pregnant mother, 27 - doesn't matter that's she pregnant, only that she's young and female

- cell biologist, male 34

- industrial engineer, 71

Why the engineer? I think his knowledge is important enough that he makes the list. Plus, he can still have children for a few years. By the time he dies the first generation will be 13 or 14 anyway and will be ready to reproduce.

-

Important Choice wrote:

You miss my meaning. I would rather have a vibrant, wonderful society that encompasses so much of the beauty and creativity of humanity, even if it were to last for a short time, rather than some artificial created, Orwellian type society.

In order to get that society, you need people. Lots of people. A society that is on the brink of extinction doesn't care for art, literature, or politics. It just cares about survival.

I think he was talking about people who actually existed at one time.

Don't agree, he is one though wrote:

i think in any case humanity would be doomed. I think for the all time people a great way for humanity to go out would be the following line up

Jesus

Muhammad

Budha

Lenin

Hittler (just to throw things of balance a bit).

It would make for some seriously interesting discussions before they all died (If Hittler didn't decide to wipe them out). Jesus might be the first to die as Hittler wouldn't stand him as a Jew. Muhhamad and Hittler would battle as Muhhamad would feel threatened as he is also semetic. Lenin would stamp out either of those as they are a threat to him, but wouldn't have a problem with Buddha unless he started to get preachy on him. So Buddha and Lenin would die naturally.

stockboy wrote:

I think he was talking about people who actually existed at one time.

Don't agree, he is one though wrote:

i think in any case humanity would be doomed. I think for the all time people a great way for humanity to go out would be the following line up

Jesus

Muhammad

Budha

Lenin

Hittler (just to throw things of balance a bit).

It would make for some seriously interesting discussions before they all died (If Hittler didn't decide to wipe them out). Jesus might be the first to die as Hittler wouldn't stand him as a Jew. Muhhamad and Hittler would battle as Muhhamad would feel threatened as he is also semetic. Lenin would stamp out either of those as they are a threat to him, but wouldn't have a problem with Buddha unless he started to get preachy on him. So Buddha and Lenin would die naturally.

I would agree that all of those people existed at one time. There is evidence of them all having lived as people. Any God-like status is left to your imagination.

I find it interesting that people think that survival at all cost is worthwhile.

You're pretty much going to be screwed after 2 generations anyway. It's not enough genetic originality to survive much longer than 3-4 generations without significant trouble. I'd choose all women, knowing that it's a moot point for my kids kids anyway. Then I'd choose the dumbest of the group of women because they'd be less likely to a) know that the genetics would make it foolish to procreate anyway, and b) because they're probably less likely to care that I'd be trying to hook up with the other 4 chicks.

i don't see why everyone picks the female first year medical student, and assumes she can take care of the health problems.

the first year of medical school is devoted almost entirely to learning the structures of the body - thats it.

you don't start learning diseases until 2nd year, and not until 3rd/4th years are you actually observing patients (not treating anyone).