Who do you Save?

[TheGreatCoolEnergy]

That's a pretty interesting point. The Rabbi could definately use some of his authority to assure that the people stay in check. But do you think there would be struggles for power between the religion (rabbi) and the law (police officer)? This has been a theme throughout history and can be seen in examples such as Cardinal Richaloue and King Louis of France. Some people supported the spritual, some supported the Law. We don't want our society to follow this same pattern, and eventually tear itself apart.

To be completely honnest, that never occured in my thought process. However, I think I would set up the majority of my new laws around my cult, so that conflict would be cut down.

Yeah, I suppose. Relgion itself won't save humanity, but if it's used well, you could create an orderly, controlled group of people.

But that still doesn't guarantee you absolute control. What happens when people start questioning their faith? They will split from your group, and then you have two opposing factions instead of one that is unified for survival.

If I could restart the world, I'd do away with countries and religion, and therefore, having less of a chance for conflict. But then again, that wouldn't eliminate discrimination, people would just find something else to hate each other for.

The only way to control people would be through a totalitarian government, but people would eventually get sick of that too, and start an uprising. There really is no way to ensure everyone's co-operation...It's times like this where "Every man for himself" comes into play.

Sorry, I'm just thinking aloud here. Do you have any ideas that would ensure no conflict? If religion, you have to take non-believers into account.

This is very true, and when the end of the day comes if there is no way to prevent conflict, as long as free will exestists. the trick is to maintian a control that appears fair enough to keep the people happy enough for things to get done (not unlike today). Also, when times are bad more people will just accept what the leaders say and question less, if it means survival (Dark ages compared to The Renisance)

 

[A.I. Sigma]

2, because she is pregnant, thus new life (although this may cause bunker problems?)

OR

1, because he will have a knowledge of books and literature after society is destroyed.

AND

6, young, thus good for procreation and will last longer than the older people.

7, because they will have some useful medical knowledge.

10, because the science will be useful later on.

3, good for procreation and physical activity afterwards.

8, to provide law in this new life.

 

[keybird]

4) An elderly male, famous historian
5) A renowned female starlet (dancer, actress, singer, songwriter, etc)
6) A college co-ed
7) A second year medical student
10)A biochemist
1) A male Librarian

 

[Shamgarr]

2, because she is pregnant, thus new life (although this may cause bunker problems?)

OR

1, because he will have a knowledge of books and literature after society is destroyed.

AND

6, young, thus good for procreation and will last longer than the older people.

7, because they will have some useful medical knowledge.

10, because the science will be useful later on.

3, good for procreation and physical activity afterwards.

8, to provide law in this new life.

this is a good one, but that's a very interesting point about the pregnant lady causing some issues in the vault.

 

[Supreme Unleaded]

#3 #5 #6 #7 #8 #10, why the singer, well someones gotta keep you entertained.

 

[Shamgarr]

That's a pretty interesting point. The Rabbi could definately use some of his authority to assure that the people stay in check. But do you think there would be struggles for power between the religion (rabbi) and the law (police officer)? This has been a theme throughout history and can be seen in examples such as Cardinal Richaloue and King Louis of France. Some people supported the spritual, some supported the Law. We don't want our society to follow this same pattern, and eventually tear itself apart.

To be completely honnest, that never occured in my thought process. However, I think I would set up the majority of my new laws around my cult, so that conflict would be cut down.

Yeah, I suppose. Relgion itself won't save humanity, but if it's used well, you could create an orderly, controlled group of people.

But that still doesn't guarantee you absolute control. What happens when people start questioning their faith? They will split from your group, and then you have two opposing factions instead of one that is unified for survival.

If I could restart the world, I'd do away with countries and religion, and therefore, having less of a chance for conflict. But then again, that wouldn't eliminate discrimination, people would just find something else to hate each other for.

The only way to control people would be through a totalitarian government, but people would eventually get sick of that too, and start an uprising. There really is no way to ensure everyone's co-operation...It's times like this where "Every man for himself" comes into play.

Sorry, I'm just thinking aloud here. Do you have any ideas that would ensure no conflict? If religion, you have to take non-believers into account.

This is very true, and when the end of the day comes if there is no way to prevent conflict, as long as free will exestists. the trick is to maintian a control that appears fair enough to keep the people happy enough for things to get done (not unlike today). Also, when times are bad more people will just accept what the leaders say and question less, if it means survival (Dark ages compared to The Renisance)

I don't know if division isn't such a bad thing. We look at the soviet/american conflict that pushed scientists to work harder and harder and inspiring conflict that would push the human race further in technological advances. Competetion is the whole concept behind darwinism itself, not to mention social darwinism. Its the divisions in society that seperate the strong from the weak and help perserve a more perfect race (not saying I agree with all this, but it sounds dynamic and worth posting).

 

[A.I. Sigma]

2, because she is pregnant, thus new life (although this may cause bunker problems?)

OR

1, because he will have a knowledge of books and literature after society is destroyed.

AND

6, young, thus good for procreation and will last longer than the older people.

7, because they will have some useful medical knowledge.

10, because the science will be useful later on.

3, good for procreation and physical activity afterwards.

8, to provide law in this new life.

this is a good one, but that's a very interesting point about the pregnant lady causing some issues in the vault.

*nod* I mean, there's only enough food for so many people. The baby will either help diminish the food, or become the food, in a very extreme and desperate scenario. O_O

 

[A.I. Sigma]

Hmm, one thing I haven't seen anyone bring up yet (although I have been skimming):

Over the years, won't humanity create a new religion? It happened in Fallout with 'Atom', although that is just fiction, and from an atheist point of view, all the religions of the world had to be thought up at some point, right?

To avoid arguments, I'll exclude modern-day religions from this.

Look at the Ancient Egyptians, the Incas, the Aztecs, the Ancient Greeks, Ancient Rome, etc. Hell, I'm Pagan, but look at that, too. Someone somewhere in time would have thought this stuff up, whether they had a dream about it and thought it was true, or were schizophrenic and thought a god was speaking to them.

Humanity has always felt the need for a higher power, and in the middle of chaos, even more so. Perhaps the modern gods would be cast aside for failing to prevent nuclear destruction, and the offspring of the survivors (inbred or otherwise) may look to new deities. Maybe science will be twisted in a way and become a religion. The religion of science, like Fallout's Atom?

The rabbi, whilst a nice touch, may evetually find himself swamped by new religion. We don't need him to preserve religion, because religion never dies.

 

[The Great JT]

The scientists and the law enforcement, and all the other spots I can save go to civilians. Because we're going to need three kinds of people in case of an apocalypse: Smart people to help advance technology, a security force to keep everyone safe and people to re-populate the world.

 

[ironmace2.0]

I would choose 2,3,4,7,10,5

 

[A Raging Emo]

I'm working purely on the assumption that 3 of the 6 people I choose will be female, and 3 male.

I would save...

The renowned Starlet,
The Second year Medical Syudent,
The Biochemist,
The Athlete,
The Police Officer,
The The Librarian.

Do bear in mind I would save the Librarian's Wife if she did the same thing and was as intelligent as the Librarian.

 

[bigdaddy95]

Does it HAVE to be a Rabbi? Can't I have a protestant priest? Well if I can then:

10
9
7
6
8
4

But if not swap 9 for 5 and myself for 3. I can honestly say I am a terrible candidate for survival and even more for presidency, my god will take me to heaven when I die along with my family and friends and they could easily just make a republic or start a democracy moderated by the police officer.

 

[IckleMissMayhem]

Well, I'd save *me* (selfish, I guess, but I don't wanna get 'sploded!)
1, (presuming he's the father of his wife's baby)
2, (she's definately capable of reproducing)
3,
7,
10.

 

[Cilliandrew]

1. College Co-ed (female)
2. Librarian's Wife
3. Med student (female)
4. Starlet
5. Male Librarian (alright, the kid needs a dad)
6. ME (I was obviously important enough to be elected, i better save myself and insure propagation of the species )

We cannot have a mine-shaft gap!

 

[Shamgarr]

Hmm, one thing I haven't seen anyone bring up yet (although I have been skimming):

Over the years, won't humanity create a new religion? It happened in Fallout with 'Atom', although that is just fiction, and from an atheist point of view, all the religions of the world had to be thought up at some point, right?

To avoid arguments, I'll exclude modern-day religions from this.

Look at the Ancient Egyptians, the Incas, the Aztecs, the Ancient Greeks, Ancient Rome, etc. Hell, I'm Pagan, but look at that, too. Someone somewhere in time would have thought this stuff up, whether they had a dream about it and thought it was true, or were schizophrenic and thought a god was speaking to them.

Humanity has always felt the need for a higher power, and in the middle of chaos, even more so. Perhaps the modern gods would be cast aside for failing to prevent nuclear destruction, and the offspring of the survivors (inbred or otherwise) may look to new deities. Maybe science will be twisted in a way and become a religion. The religion of science, like Fallout's Atom?

The rabbi, whilst a nice touch, may evetually find himself swamped by new religion. We don't need him to preserve religion, because religion never dies.

I made this point earlier, and completely agree with you that religion never dies. My argument then was that a new religion created sometime in the future would be without structure, order, or a spiritual guide. That is why I would keep the rabbi, because he is that spiritual leader that would keep it in check.

Does it HAVE to be a Rabbi? Can't I have a protestant priest? Well if I can then:

10
9
7
6
8
4

But if not swap 9 for 5 and myself for 3. I can honestly say I am a terrible candidate for survival and even more for presidency, my god will take me to heaven when I die along with my family and friends and they could easily just make a republic or start a democracy moderated by the police officer.

Technically, we decided earlier that the rabbi can be the leader of any relgion, so i suppose he can be a... baptist Rabbi! or a... muslim rabbi! or an atheist rabbi! well maybe not the last one.

 

[TheGreatCoolEnergy]

I don't know if division isn't such a bad thing. We look at the soviet/american conflict that pushed scientists to work harder and harder and inspiring conflict that would push the human race further in technological advances. Competetion is the whole concept behind darwinism itself, not to mention social darwinism. Its the divisions in society that seperate the strong from the weak and help perserve a more perfect race (not saying I agree with all this, but it sounds dynamic and worth posting).

Not bad, but with a few problems. 1st off, yes the cold war advanced technology. But we also sat on hair trigger for 20 years. It is very possible that one off comment and we wouldnt need to have this discussion, because we would be there deciding for our selves. And yes division is essential, but when you only have a tiny group and you need food,shelter,defense,water,ect. the last thing you want is an argument breaking out over "why are we following this loser?". For most of history, when living was make or break, people accepted things like religion and chieftans. As soon as we advanced far enough that things started getting cushy(The Reniscance) people started questionning there king and their god. I believe that this is no coincidence.

 

[nicholaxxx]

the cop, the co-ed, the medic, the rabbi, the librarian's wife, the historian

the smartest and most fit for survival (with a woman to repopulate with)

 

[SultanP]

Restart the entire human race from six people? That's ridiculous! I'd bring all the good looking females, and one or two males if I clicked with them. If I wouldn't be able to get along well with any of the males, I would save none, if none of the females were attractive I wouldn't save any of them either. Then I'd have a sweet-ass bunker all to myself.

 

[Takoto]

We did something slightly similar in Sociology (exactly the same scenario, however different people), in this situation, I would save:

2) The Librarian's wife, who is 6 months pregnant
3) An Olympic male Athlete (for arguments sake, of all sports)
4) An elderly male, famous historian
7) A second year medical student
9) A rabbi
10) A biochemist

The Librarian's wife has a child, and she is a women, therefore could help repopulate the earth. The Olympic male because he can teach future generations about certain exercises and how to keep fit. Even though old, the historian may be able to document/write about the history he knows, therefore being able to pass it on. The medical student and the biochemist because they're knowledge could be passed on, and help future generations, and the Rabbi because even though some people think Religion can be a negative thing, sometimes it's good... I dunno.

 

[Shamgarr]

I don't know if division isn't such a bad thing. We look at the soviet/american conflict that pushed scientists to work harder and harder and inspiring conflict that would push the human race further in technological advances. Competetion is the whole concept behind darwinism itself, not to mention social darwinism. Its the divisions in society that seperate the strong from the weak and help perserve a more perfect race (not saying I agree with all this, but it sounds dynamic and worth posting).

Not bad, but with a few problems. 1st off, yes the cold war advanced technology. But we also sat on hair trigger for 20 years. It is very possible that one off comment and we wouldnt need to have this discussion, because we would be there deciding for our selves. And yes division is essential, but when you only have a tiny group and you need food,shelter,defense,water,ect. the last thing you want is an argument breaking out over "why are we following this loser?". For most of history, when living was make or break, people accepted things like religion and chieftans. As soon as we advanced far enough that things started getting cushy(The Reniscance) people started questionning there king and their god. I believe that this is no coincidence.

Yeah, I agree that for the most part (especially in the primary foundation of a new civilization) that division will only weaken our chances of surviving. I'm hoping that the survivors would be able to look past their conflicts in light of there current situation, and come together as a single unit. The most effective means BY WHICH TO COME TOGETHER (in my opinion) is religion, simply because it has done this for thousands upon thousands of years. I'm not even asking the survivors to believe the religion, but to simply embrace it (not as truth) but as fellowship. This is why I choose to save the Rabbi.
And a word about competition-
Like I said, it won't help at all if it comes anytime before we have a pretty steady population, but it is most likely inevitable that factions will be formed and divisions in beliefs, strengths, etc. will fight for power. It is this struggle that will sling-shot humans into the future; this thirst for power, quenched only in the fountains of intellectual superiority.