(urth) Doomed multitudes

[maru]

...
You know what I mean.

But the reason I am using worlds as a measurement is that
that is the simplest way of saying it.  I could say something
along the lines of all these 'containers' are necessarily the same size
and so you couldn't separate into six containers; or I could say 
something along
the lines that if you take Urth out of the picture you have irrevocably 
reduced
the future potential of the worlds of man, and this reduced potential 
will more than
outweigh the people spared a New Sun. And so on.
 
The perspective that makes this a valid way of measuring is a long-term, 
universal
viewpoint, which treats all humans as equal.

~Maru

Chris wrote:

> That's actually not a difficult question at all; in fact it *seems* so 
> obvious how he "can say" it that I won't bother to try to answer it. 
> Instead I'll ask a more productive question:
>
> Why are you using "worlds" as a unit of measurement instead of 
> individual human lives?
>
> Related: What kind of perspective would it require to make this a 
> valid way to measure?
>
> To bake a cake for six people: put two containers full of the relevant 
> ingredients into one container, and process appropriately. Separate 
> contents into six containers and serve.
>
> Maru said:
>
>> Please explain to me how you can say that N worlds of people (where N 
>> represents the totality
>> of worlds colonized by man, including a revitalized Urth/Ushas) could 
>> possibly only
>> equal or be less (!) than N-1 worlds of people.
>>
>> ~Maru
>