That which does not kill me
Makes me more susceptible to secondary infections.
I survived the disease and all I got were these horrible scars.
The Marjon Community Council adopts a system of majority voting and everything settles down after that.
But then Marjonians start dropping dead from some terrible disease which is a consequence of the irrigation canals. They are a breeding ground for pesky-flies and if something isn’t done, about two-thirds of the population will die. Fortunately, according to the government druid, if they chew the leaves of the tabako plant, they’ll be immunised against the disease.
The proposal for compulsory mass immunisation is put to the Community Council and is about to be passed unanimously when someone raises the question of people reacting badly to the effects of tabako. The druid admits that about a twentieth of the population will die because of an adverse reaction to the leaves, but once the disease strikes, the leaves are ineffective.
How should the Council vote? For or against?
If they were to be utilitarians about it, they ought to vote for it. One twentieth sounds much better than two-thirds as the death rate. It also means that the remaining population would pass on their genetic tolerance for the tabako leaves to their offspring. After all, it’s just evolution at work – sort of.
In this particular scenario, there seems to be no solution without someone dying sooner or later. You might say that they should destroy the network of irrigation canals, but that puts them back on square one unless the climate improves. They probably don’t have the means to eradicate the fly population short of trying to kill them all, which would be an impossible task.
But then Marjonians start dropping dead from some terrible disease which is a consequence of the irrigation canals. They are a breeding ground for pesky-flies and if something isn’t done, about two-thirds of the population will die. Fortunately, according to the government druid, if they chew the leaves of the tabako plant, they’ll be immunised against the disease.
The proposal for compulsory mass immunisation is put to the Community Council and is about to be passed unanimously when someone raises the question of people reacting badly to the effects of tabako. The druid admits that about a twentieth of the population will die because of an adverse reaction to the leaves, but once the disease strikes, the leaves are ineffective.
How should the Council vote? For or against?
If they were to be utilitarians about it, they ought to vote for it. One twentieth sounds much better than two-thirds as the death rate. It also means that the remaining population would pass on their genetic tolerance for the tabako leaves to their offspring. After all, it’s just evolution at work – sort of.
In this particular scenario, there seems to be no solution without someone dying sooner or later. You might say that they should destroy the network of irrigation canals, but that puts them back on square one unless the climate improves. They probably don’t have the means to eradicate the fly population short of trying to kill them all, which would be an impossible task.
But wait! There’s more…
I survived the disease and all I got were these horrible scars.
One of the Marjonians has had the disease and survived. To him it seems unnecessary to knowingly risk his life by eating the tabako leaves to immunise himself against a disease he’s naturally immune to. But the Community Council vote in favour of the programme.
If everyone is made to eat the leaves, is such a decision fair and democratic or unfair and despotic?
The problem is that the Marjonians cannot know three things. The first is who will succumb to the pesky-fly disease if they haven’t already had it and survived; the second is who will succumb to the effects of the tabako leaves; the third is who might survive the former but not the latter. The third group are going to die for the least good reason so that if they’re made to chew the leaves as part of the programme, it’s really no different from shooting them for no good reason.
In other words, the scenario end up coming full circle. The compulsory immunisation programme is the same as the old requirement for Council decisions to be unanimous and leads to the same sort of problems. Of course, they doesn’t really clear up the issues about who will die one way or the other. A programme which could identify groups would help.
If everyone is made to eat the leaves, is such a decision fair and democratic or unfair and despotic?
The problem is that the Marjonians cannot know three things. The first is who will succumb to the pesky-fly disease if they haven’t already had it and survived; the second is who will succumb to the effects of the tabako leaves; the third is who might survive the former but not the latter. The third group are going to die for the least good reason so that if they’re made to chew the leaves as part of the programme, it’s really no different from shooting them for no good reason.
In other words, the scenario end up coming full circle. The compulsory immunisation programme is the same as the old requirement for Council decisions to be unanimous and leads to the same sort of problems. Of course, they doesn’t really clear up the issues about who will die one way or the other. A programme which could identify groups would help.
We’re off to the democratic Diktatia tomorrow as the nation faces a health crisis. Don’t ask for ice cream.
Comments