Myheartisoutatsea - Home Of The Artisans

Speaking ill of the Dead

Okay, let’s have this conversation. The tragedy on the Titan Sub is an incredibly complicated topic, less so because of the actual technical issues of the submarine but for the actions of the company and crew. Perhaps by calling it a tragedy I have already made my opinion somewhat clear, but let me lament about the topic a bit further.

Clearly the company did not take well enough actions prior to the dive of the submarine. It has had no peer review, not certification, and every attempt to express concern on the Submarines integrity was ignored in favor of a quicker time tune over and a profit. This is an inherent problem in the Adventure industry, where something that is meant to be undertaken slowly, carefully, and by well prepared experts is done by people who want an adrenaline rush and an experience. This leads to a lot of tragedy in the Industry.

Secondly, the crew aboard has made some questionable designs in their life. I believe one report I saw claimed the co-founder of OceanGate and pilot of the Submarine was previously a private jet owner and flyer and thus according the account responsible for heavy air pollution and in passion of already great wealth. I believe they (the author of the account) found this to be abhorrent, and anybody who respects this earth would react to pollution, and found him to be a terrible human being.

There is also the issue of whether or not the site of tragedy should be a tourist destination, and also the waver the crew signed when entering the vessel. The waver clearly stated it was an experimental vessel and an uncertified one at that.

Now none of these are what I have an issue with, seeing as I honestly think many mistake were made, that’s what makes it a tragedy and not a horror. What I have issue with it going around saying they deserved death, as though we should let people make their beds and lie in them, as though we should look death in the face and call it humane and right, as though I am supposed to speak ill of dead men for their money.

So I’m going to go into these issues, from the point of view of a Sailors child. My parent is a sailor, and a Submariner at that. We’ve had extensive talks about the issues here, and I’d like to poke a few holes, a patch a few others, and make some conversation while I’m at it.

I would like to ask you dear readers, what in the world do you actually know about Submarines? Had you read that waver, would you honestly believe there would better options? Would you know about the three to five organizations that certify Submarines or would you assume uncertified meant non-military? Would you not assume this new and amazing technologically was of course experimental? For what else could innovation in adventure be?

There has been some outrage about the fact that the submarine was piloted by a game controller, well guess what, Navy Submarines have them too. Until very recently most Periscopes on Submarines were made to function through a highly calibrated set of mirrors. Quite literally mirrors. The submarine scene from the Fast and Furious 8 movie made me so mad, because there is not enough technology in an older submarine for Cipher to hack if she tried. Now, the most recent submarines use digital cameras in their periscopes. Want to know how they maneuver that? With an Xbox game controller. One of the Sailors pointed out that the technology for game control, meant to be intuitive to the user, could be very useful on the submarine and thus the engineers made it happen. Do not pretend the wireless, intuitive controller is not amazing technology because it helps you play video games.

Another thing about Submarines, did you know that worldwide, during peace time, many nations have a specific system set up with each other to do search and rescue for submarines? Look up the disappearance of the ARA San Juan, an Argentina sub that also imploded and was only located with national help. The Hulk wasn’t too far off when he talked about being in a pressurized can being a bad idea. Submarines are some of the most deadly machines we have, in their military use and how much danger there is to operate them. As such, the international community reacts to them according. The US Navy specifically has a policy of being able to launch search and recovery equipment to the needed location or at least en route to within 24 hours of notification. This includes sonar and deep sea ROVs. Based on previous precedence set by Submarine emergencies, the international community is more likely to respond to Submarine disasters quicker, they have less time.

So Yes, the tragedy of the refugee ship of Greece is a politically fueled tragedy and loss of life, but it is not the same as the Titan. The Titan didn’t get more attention because it has billionaires on board, it got more attention because it was a Submarine. Submarines have the benefit of being a recent dilemma for the world theaters, so they have more modern solutions while Refugees and Sailing ships have had centuries of existence to be wrangled into political machinations that make it complicated to rescue too retrieve.

What is more likely to be a problem is the retrieval or lack there of the bodies, as those bodies are usually mounted over, but bodies lost at sea rarely get returned. The Navy has always held that the ocean is a fit and final resting place for those lost at sea, and while due respect is paid to their loss, retrieving the bodies and wreckage is harrowing and expensive. If you truly want to rage against those with a lot of a money, start asking who’s going to be paying for the retrieval operation and all that time spent searching. I would argue it should be OceanGate, for their negligence in the integrity of their Submarine lead to a loss of life.

I will also honestly say this, I hate to speak ill of the dead even when it must be done. Yes, some of these people lost did terrible things, but they did not only do evil in their life and their story should not just be “They did this but they also did this!” it should be instead “They did this and this.” Was the french diver not also one of the only certified people to take wreckage from the Titanic to surface for study, posterity, and for museums? Was the British explorer not also a history enthusiast who was excited to see a piece of history he studied so fondly? Was the Son not also a student? Perhaps the pilot did pollute the earth, you’d be hard pressed to find someone who hadn’t, his crime is perhaps instead doing nothing to fix pollution.

I believe a lot of us apply Spiderman's “With Great Power comes Great Responsibility” to those with Wealth, and while not wrong we get too disappointed when they fail to meet our standards. They are not obligated to help the world, as much as we need them to be. We want them to be better people, but they won’t always be. It is not wealth that made them bad, but their actions or lack thereof with it that did.

The Navy hosts something called the Submarine ball, to celebrate the creation of the Submarine force. And every Submarine ball, they will list the submarines sunk and the life lost on them. I have gone too many times, heard that speech and list too many times to call the death by horrific pressure and cold and drowning something somebody has to have had deserved.

Look up the specifics of implosion, of death, of how your blood boils if you rise to fast, of the cold seeping in so fast you feel like ice, to the lack of hair, and tell me you wish that on people. Tell me you have enough in you to wish somebody to die by the sea, lost and scared, and tell me how that makes you a righteous and good person. By all means rage an injustice, rage at the unfair, but do not turn that into a right to murder, to kill, and wish death on others.

Dad Talks. EP. 1 | Ethical Economics AKA Humanity vs. Capitalism

The Context - Discussion with friend over text

Friend : We still put money before people.

Me : But as humanity grows we’re more knowledgeable now, and we’ll catch people and hold them accountable for it.

Friend : Literally the opposite has happened.

Me : I refuse to give up on the good of humanity.

Friend : Oh, Humanity is good. Capitalism is evil.

The Discussion with Dad - Also over text, and prompted by me presenting the above discussion and my thoughts on it.

Me : Greed is evil, economy is a neutral entity that is wielded. It is one man’s greed that sours it.

Well this poses an interesting question.

Can a concept, which due to the nature of human history, is created by man be neutral? If it is created by humans, who are intrinsically biased and lean forwards either positive or negative questions, then can it truly be neutral?

Can I claim that something man made is neutral when I proclaim man is good but inherently fallible?

Dad : Sounds like you are doing fine. You pose the more interesting question. Capitalism, and even the idea of economics, are man-made creations. But not necessarily in the way a building or an invention is, or.a book or painting.

Economics comes from the idea that humans require, or desire, certain things to survive, and take action to acquire those things. As the types and numbers of things fluctuate, as well as how many humans and there are and how those things are produced, certain patterns of behavior emerge that seem to be driven by the numerous variable. Hence we study economics as a sort of science - it seems to operate under certain principles that can be deduced by observation and testing. It’s sort of like anthropology or sociology, we are trying to understand how humans have developed or how they will respond.

Me : So in considering it’s study being a science, can we presume we should be neutral in judging its patterns and more so directing moral judgements on those who use the properties of economics to act?

Dad : Capitalism is at, its heart, a theory of economics. One might even say it is the most basic and fundamental theory of how economics works. But it makes assumptions about how people respond to their economic stimuli and their motives. The primary assumption is that people will act to maximize their things. (Keep in mind that I am not an economist and that there is a great deal of literature on this topic - it has been studied a lot.)

There are other theories that predict that people and societies react differently. Capitalism tends to be more individualistic. Socialism and communism more focused on the wellness of the group.

Me : So does capitalism assume greed or does capitalism encourage greed?

Dad : I think you can approach any of those theories with a certain neutrality; the theories themselves are neither good nor evil. How people apply those theories can be approached from an ethical standpoint.

Me : Fair.

Dad : Does capitalism assume greed or encourage greed? Interesting question. Probably both, but even greed might not be the right word.

Then the question is what is the word that capitalism works off of.

Well, the question overall is interesting because in economics it is difficult to separate economic theory from an economic system. That is precisely because humans are involved. It is a bit like Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle or Schrodinger’s Cat - you can’t know the outcome or state of the system unless you act to measure it, but your act of measuring it determines the state of the system.

In economics, how one believes the system works depends partly on how one believes humans act or should act, and humans can work in different ways.

Me : Damn.

This leaves me and my friend very much at odds because I believe we think inherently differently on the way humans work. I think we both find humans to be naturally good, but I more easily overlook the times human do bad to embrace the times human do good while they are the reverse.

I will lean towards capitalism because I like the individualistic approach while still having great faith that more times than not humans will do good.

Dad : You will find there are several different version of capitalism as an economic and political ideology.

Me : But my friend leans towards socialism because they have seen too many times that humanity can be bad and the system abused, so an economic plan for the welfare of all appeals more to them because they believe the opportunity for bad is inherently tempting.

It worries me that I may only find capitalism appealing because I think I myself will work well in it, or perhaps that is my privilege that leads me to favor capitalism.

Dad : Humans are involved in all of these systems. There are no robots or divine forces that will be kind to everyone if only we let them.

Socialism relies on good governance to work. It can be as poorly applied as capitalism.

Me : True.

Dad : Capitalism often maximizes freedom of the individual, which allows individuals to flourish more than other systems, but also allows individuals fail more than other systems. It can also lead to unhealthy balances of power or wealth that can twist the system into actually being intrinsically unfair. This is likely because capitalism is a near perfect theory in an ‘unbounded’ system (resources and people and space are limitless), but when applied more practically to the bounded systems we actually live in it needs some regulation and constraint. (My own personal theory - might be complete B.S.)

Me : Don’t sell yourself too short, it’s the observation of peers that make a theory sound.

---

Quote of the Day : From the Classic Doctor Who Series, in the final episode of the Castrovalva.

The Master, to the people he has created - “You do not have the will to do it.”

The People he made, responds with - “You may have made us, Man of Evil, but we are free.”

*Proceeds to swing on a chandelier and break both the Masters machine and plan.*

---

Food and more reading for thought : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/economics/