Re:What You Can Learn from Living in Antarctica
by Chris2048 on Friday November 20, 2020 @12:15PM
(#25162516)
Just getting to this, I didn't downvote, but I still disagree with these points.
> Saying "under allow no conditions where a person cannot choose to leave" is rather naïve
I didn't mean literally cannot leave, I mean choose to leave, i.e when safe to do so, rather than being forced to stay by naval order or contract. Though admittedly it's hard to find if that is the case in some of the historical examples.
> shows a profound lack of respect for the realities of working in one of the harshest and most unforgiving environments on the planet
Why? If you commit human beings to an environment you either allow the conditions that will keep them sane, or you call the whole thing off. As soon as you decide the difficulty is surmountable, you lose this excuse, because not doing it is also an option.
Would you build a station without a toilet or food? Then why not extra space? Skipping both will save money/effort, yet "there's more to living than just surviving" - both are requirements. If providing extra space is too hard, then the whole thing is too hard.
The previous point only compounds this: "you're better off locking them up until the summer when they can be collected safely" - If you can't control how long they'll be there, ensure the environment is one they can remain emotionally stable in, or don't send them there at all.
> Saying "under allow no conditions where a person cannot choose to leave" is rather naïve
I didn't mean literally cannot leave, I mean choose to leave, i.e when safe to do so, rather than being forced to stay by naval order or contract. Though admittedly it's hard to find if that is the case in some of the historical examples.
> shows a profound lack of respect for the realities of working in one of the harshest and most unforgiving environments on the planet
Why? If you commit human beings to an environment you either allow the conditions that will keep them sane, or you call the whole thing off. As soon as you decide the difficulty is surmountable, you lose this excuse, because not doing it is also an option.
Would you build a station without a toilet or food? Then why not extra space? Skipping both will save money/effort, yet "there's more to living than just surviving" - both are requirements. If providing extra space is too hard, then the whole thing is too hard.
The previous point only compounds this: "you're better off locking them up until the summer when they can be collected safely" - If you can't control how long they'll be there, ensure the environment is one they can remain emotionally stable in, or don't send them there at all.