Bubbles and Life

[Featherstar]

(Yes, I'm relatively new and this is my first time starting a debate. I read the rules twice to make sure I'm not missing anything, but please please tell me if I'm doing anything wrong. ^^ Thanks!!)

 

 

 

This is a rather opinion-oriented debate, but I thought it'd be interesting so I figured I'd post it here.

 

 

So, you've found a jar of bubbles. Of course the bubbles inside are non-living, so they have no senses and know nothing and are not conscious. Then you're told that if you opened the lid to this jar, the bubbles would come out and would come to life. So if you opened the lid, they would feel, know, think, have a conscience, just like a human being, and they would also be happy. But their life would last only one second (from the opening of the jar), before they popped and were wiped from existence once more - in essence, painlessly killed. Would you open the jar if you were given the choice?

[Divya Bean]

Ooooohhhh that is sooo hard! Why did you post this hard choice? Now I HAVE to answer! :laughingsmiley:

 

Lets see...I would probably let them out because they are basically dead if they in the jar, so they deserve a second of life before they become dead again. Thats my logic. :laughingsmiley:

[Spritzie]

I'm going to agree with Divya on this. I would open it. They wouldn't know the difference if you didn't. But if you did, they would get that for a short amount of time. Even though afterwards, it would be as if they never were.

 

Interest question.

[Featherstar]

Thanks! :3

 

In my opinion, I'd let them go as well - because in 'the grand scheme of things', our lives may as well be seen as only a blink in time, and we'll eventually die in the end. But if given the choice, I'd definitely want to live my life however short it may seem (perhaps to a billion times longer living being).

 

 

I wonder if anyone'd rather not open it. Maybe because of the guilt when they die or the responsibility or... I dunno. xD Anyone?

[CAV of Gang Green]

This is a very interesting and puzzling question. They die either way, but I'd go with Divvy on this one. Better to have lived for a second than to have never lived at all.

[devilyangel728]

I think the answer to the question might have to do with what you think happens after you die.

 

Do all sentient bubbles go to heaven?

[Secre]

I think I'd say that it depends on whether them popping and dying is painful for them (if they have a consiousness they can feel pain). Because if it is painful then the question needs to be asked whether that second of being happy is worth the pain of dying, or whether the unconsiousness that they have in the jar before they are released is preferable.

 

It's difficult because they are not alive in the jar but would be happy during their second of life when released, but if their death caused them pain then perhaps they would be better off spending eternity in the jar rather than suffering such for that one second...

 

Granted, I don't know if their death would be painful, but that's the thought process that immediately ran through my mind!

[Featherstar]

Hmm, you bring up a good point, Secre.

 

Maybe if we assumed the dying didn't physically hurt, but they knew they were fated to die, they knew that you were the one who made this decision and understood your decision, but were still happy for the one second they lived? :3

[Ro-]

To be honest, I don't see this as a dilemma at all. If they never live, they won't care if they exist. Obviously it is better to have happiness than infinite nothingness.

[crystallll]

I can understand why someone WOULDNT open the jar... if they had no feelings, then they wouldnt be able to feel sadness or the pain of dying, but if the jar was open they would suddenly have knowledge and a one-second experience in living... the question is almost impossible!! i guess it's about what you value more... happiness(as in no pain) or knowledge. I, personally would probably let them out just out of curiosity to see how a bubble would act if it had a brain.

[Ro-]

The original poster said dying was not painful, and they were guaranteed happiness.

[Cornflakes]

Nope, I wouldn't open the jar.

 

"There's no scientific consensus that life is important." - Professor Hubert Farnsworth

[Secre]

The original poster said dying was not painful, and they were guaranteed happiness.

 

Thanks for pointing that out - I'd missed the all important word in that sentence! In that caase I'd let them out. That one second would be worth it.

[Featherstar]

I see. :3

 

Haha, Cornflakes - your argument is interesting. xD So life isn't important? ^^

[-Ryan]

Let them out so they can have their deserved second, but i'd like to know if they can see. Can they see where they are and everything around them? Because if so then I would take them somewhere beautiful before letting them live.

[Cornflakes]

Haha, Cornflakes - your argument is interesting. xD So life isn't important? ^^

 

Don't get me wrong - I am opposed to the death penalty, and I'm somewhere inbetween pro-choice and outlawing abortion altogether. At my basest core, human and animal and plant and all other kinds of lives are absolutely precious to me.

 

Having said that, I honestly don't see the value of ever having been alive. I think it's far more tragic for something or someone to live and then die, rather than to have never been alive, even if the life in question was filled with perfect happiness and ended in a painless death.

 

"The existentialist says at once that man is anguish." - Jean-Paul Sartre

 

 

*Chuckles to self* Wow, that sounded really bleak, didn't it...I think I need to go eat an ice cream and cheer up :P

[Quark]

Don't get me wrong - I am opposed to the death penalty, and I'm somewhere inbetween pro-choice and outlawing abortion altogether. At my basest core, human and animal and plant and all other kinds of lives are absolutely precious to me.

 

Having said that, I honestly don't see the value of ever having been alive. I think it's far more tragic for something or someone to live and then die, rather than to have never been alive, even if the life in question was filled with perfect happiness and ended in a painless death.

 

"The existentialist says at once that man is anguish." - Jean-Paul Sartre

 

 

*Chuckles to self* Wow, that sounded really bleak, didn't it...I think I need to go eat an ice cream and cheer up :P

Gotta agree with you on some points there. (Although I'm pro-choice, it's more of about a safety issue and libertarianism than much else, but that's a totally different subject.)

Life fascinates us because we are alive. We cannot fathom any other state of being, even though we have already "experienced" it, so to speak, before our births. Humans are typically more interested in the idea of life on another planet than say, its chemical composition or weather. (Well, heh, not me, but as the astronomy geek, I'll hush up.) It's not that I wouldn't be thrilled to see a new species live and die before my eyes, it's that I don't think Life with a capital L is the most important thing in this universe.

Although, I'd still open the bottle out of curiosity but hey, I'm a flawed living human being too. :P Interesting question. *rubs palms together* I think I'll like this forum. <3

[-Ryan]

I have to say, excellent question Feather, you really got everyones debate side going and their minds working. :)

[Ro-]

Is non-life important? Life is obviously unimportant, but at least it would be enjoyed. Where is the value in allowing them to exist forever?

[antiaircraft]

As a guy stuck with an obsessively scientific mind, I'm going to cheat a bit and say that I would carefully study the bubbles in their in-jar state, trying to figure out the mechanisms of their metabolism and all the other secrets that might be hidden inside them. That way, I'd learn something myself in the process, and that knowledge might be useful elsewhere to me or somebody else. And maybe, just maybe, it would be possible to figure out a way to give the bubbles happy, long lives. :yes:

 

Essentially, I'd want more information before coming to a decision.

[Cornflakes]

Back to the original question: Additionally, I couldn't play God. Just being given this choice would weigh heavily on my conscience. How could I live with myself knowing that I made the choice to terminate all of those lives? Better to just never let them experience life at all.

(Of course, the decision to never let them experience life at all would also keep me up at night. But I would find solace in the fact that the bubbles are blissfully ignorant.)

 

I cannot be responsible for ending a life. That's not my job. I myself am a Christian, and so I believe that job is held solely by our Creator.

 

Even if you don't believe in God, you must know there are forces out there that are infinitely more powerful than us - the Universe, the Sun, Gaia, or whatever you choose to believe in.

 

Is non-life important? Life is obviously unimportant, but at least it would be enjoyed. Where is the value in allowing them to exist forever?

 

Is non-life important? No. Is a rock important? Is a sweater important? No. While inanimate objects hold some measure of importance to living things, they are ultimately not important. Loading a lifeboat from a sinking ship, do you choose to save a lady or a cement block?

Exactly.

 

"Life is obviously unimportant" - I disagree. Every minute, in countless wonderful and mysterious miracles all over Earth (and most likely the rest of the universe as well), cells learn the secrets of metabolism and begin to organize...heart cells flutter and immediately begin pulsating at a steady tempo.... and then the other complex processes that lead to an object being academically defined as "a living thing" take place. After all of these events occur, the object in question becomes VERY important.

 

What I feel is unimportant is existence in general. Simply put, it's better to have never lived at all than to live and then die.

 

"at least it would be enjoyed" - Apparently we are not here to enjoy life. Life is filled with pain, loss, devastation, nuclear wars, death, heartbreak, et al...no living being exists in the absence of some degree of suffering. To give the bubbles a perfect (albeit short) existence is to defy the basest principles of life.

 

 

 

I could really debate this all day - I didn't even address the spiritual definitions of life, vis-à-vis the soul - but I need to stop and eat some lunch. :)

[Featherstar]

WOW.

 

You guys are really impressive. xD I could never have thought up that much philosophy to talk about that's still relevant to my question. :3

 

 

This is really interesting to read- it makes me rethink my own perspective on the idea I had before I created the topic.

 

How could I live with myself knowing that I made the choice to terminate all of those lives? Better to just never let them experience life at all.

(Of course, the decision to never let them experience life at all would also keep me up at night. But I would find solace in the fact that the bubbles are blissfully ignorant.)

 

The thing about that is; I might feel guilty about terminating their life, but their life only ended because I gave it to them. In a way, I'm beginning to view this question from the point of view of a mother (I suppose a human mother - it's easier to relate). A mother that will live for fifty million trillion years, yet whose children have the normal lifespan of a human. Would she give birth to the child? Is she "terminating their life" by giving life to them? She knows that her future child's life will end in a blink of an eye, but she also knows that child would be happy in this world.

So maybe the only difference between this bubble scenario and real life is the time-scale. So when you have children, you're opening the lid of the jar...

[Cornflakes]

It is a really, really good question that raises a lot of issues. I think I might ask my Facebook friends and see what they have to say too. :)

[Featherstar]

Please do! xD The more opinions the better; they're all so interesting to read.

 

 

And thanks for the compliment. ^^ It wouldn't be nearly as great if people like you didn't really find deeper meanings; many that didn't even cross my mind when I wrote it! x3

[Quark]

I think this question is begging for someone to write a science fiction novel about it.