james_davis_nicoll (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
james_davis_nicoll) wrote2011-02-12 08:11 pm
james_davis_nicoll) wrote2011-02-12 08:11 pm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Unless we also have inexpensive, perfectly-accurage geneology, the risk of rescuing one's own ancestors from abusive situations and thereby causing oneself to no longer exist is too great. And one's ancestors, left orphaned by one's ceased existence, might be placed into abusive foster care situations, rendering one's self-sacrifice moot.
Yes, of course -- unless, of course, there are costs associated with that choice. It's a worthy goal, but not a goal worth absolutely any price. The potential prices in time travel scenarios extend up to destruction of the universe (in fiction; the only place I really know anything about time travel from).
Is this a world where such a thing has been achieved in the *present*?
Either that would be rewriting history, which would be a horrendous crime on the scale of multiple omnicides (or even worse, if we're wiping out the whole Universe), or we're just creating alternative versions of the children in alternative timelines, leaving the originals behind. And if the timeline can't be tampered with at all, then it's just impossible, because we'd already know it would happen. Or maybe we're working with more complex off-road alternative timelines within a larger unchangeable meta-timeline that cause themselves to disappear from the timeline due to a future event returning everything back into the status quo ante chronofuck, which is also pointless.
I like the Kage Baker method of rescuing children 5 minutes before inevitable death. I think rescuing children who are otherwise viable would result in too many ripples.
Yes, no, and maybe - insufficient data.
I was thinking the same thing. And what about situations defined *today* as abusive, but not so then?
No, unless it were possible to know for sure that they'd never have had any descendants in their own time.
Even then, how far back can you go? How will we provide for them in the present day, not just in terms of subsistence but in terms of education and acclimatisation?
Even then, how far back can you go? How will we provide for them in the present day, not just in terms of subsistence but in terms of education and acclimatisation?
ding Exactly.
Why stop at children? Why stop at humans?
Why stop at children? Why stop at humans?
Define "abusive". Define "child". Define target species said "children" are members of.
(For example: does "abuse of children" cover neonates born with anencephaly (WARNING: graphic images) or other fatal neural tube defects who are being allowed to die?)
(For example: does "abuse of children" cover neonates born with anencephaly (WARNING: graphic images) or other fatal neural tube defects who are being allowed to die?)
Edited 2011-02-12 20:55 (UTC)
Hmm. Does anyone know if KB ever read "Air Raid" by Varley?
You unutterable fool!!1!! Aren't we DOOOOOOOOOOOOMed enough from staggering over population without dragging MORE potential breeders into the situation?!?11!
The suffering makes them stronger.
(Also, most of the previous comments.)
(Also, most of the previous comments.)
Yes but what do you do with them then?
I note that others also mentioned affects on the time stream.
I note that others also mentioned affects on the time stream.
"A Modest Proposal" springs to mind.
Also, all animals being about to be killed by predators
Actually, maybe we could transmit them into the depopulated, post-doomcrash future ...
I wish you had included another question on this poll, as I'd like to see how well the answers mapped. "Are/were you at any time an abused child?"
I also note that while the vast majority of commentors are of the No opinion, the current tally is 12 Yes, 9 No, and 11 Would Like To Complain.
I also note that while the vast majority of commentors are of the No opinion, the current tally is 12 Yes, 9 No, and 11 Would Like To Complain.
I was, by both the standards of the time as well as the standards of current childrearing theory. (abused, that is)
I voted against the plan, for a variety of reasons that will remain undiscussed at this time.
I voted against the plan, for a variety of reasons that will remain undiscussed at this time.
Yes, that's right...this poll is missing cats!
I was not in any sense I recognize (or any sense I think society would recognize) an abused child.
I voted "yes"; but as I hope my comment made clear, I think that if the full consequences of doing so were laid out, I would very likely have to change my vote to "no". It's a no-brainer "yes" so long as it's really "free", and no cost other than "inexpensive" is mentioned in the question, but of course any real situation wouldn't be; both direct immediate consequences (what having those children here would involve) and indirect consequences (time-stream questions) would have to be considered.
I voted "yes"; but as I hope my comment made clear, I think that if the full consequences of doing so were laid out, I would very likely have to change my vote to "no". It's a no-brainer "yes" so long as it's really "free", and no cost other than "inexpensive" is mentioned in the question, but of course any real situation wouldn't be; both direct immediate consequences (what having those children here would involve) and indirect consequences (time-stream questions) would have to be considered.
I cannot say yes, I cannot say no. What actions do these abused children take, what interactions with them both at the time, and later in life, that caused events to flow such that the time traveler's present happened?
Contemplating removing people en mass from the timestream for good reason, is like waiting in one's vehicle at a train crossing, watching an oblivious child try to hurry across.
You know that if nothing happens, the child will be hit by the train.
You know that if you put your car in gear and drive between the child and train, you will destroy yourself, whatever your car hits... and the child might not be hit.
Perhaps a compromise would be to provide therapy, pull the child out of time, give them the ability to cope better, and put them back?
Incidentally, I just re-read Making Money. An obsessive, miserable, possibly Aspergers-suffering person was abducted and given an instant mind-fix by the use of a helpful Igor and a turnip. He became a well-adjusted, happy, content person... with absolutely no artistic talent whatsoever. Is it worth the disruption of all history to do this?
I can't say yes, I can't say no...
Contemplating removing people en mass from the timestream for good reason, is like waiting in one's vehicle at a train crossing, watching an oblivious child try to hurry across.
You know that if nothing happens, the child will be hit by the train.
You know that if you put your car in gear and drive between the child and train, you will destroy yourself, whatever your car hits... and the child might not be hit.
Perhaps a compromise would be to provide therapy, pull the child out of time, give them the ability to cope better, and put them back?
Incidentally, I just re-read Making Money. An obsessive, miserable, possibly Aspergers-suffering person was abducted and given an instant mind-fix by the use of a helpful Igor and a turnip. He became a well-adjusted, happy, content person... with absolutely no artistic talent whatsoever. Is it worth the disruption of all history to do this?
I can't say yes, I can't say no...
Page 1 of 3