Time travel ethics / Categorical Imperative

[snowyowl]

For that story, I award you one crumb. Go lick the bottom of the cookie jar, you've earned it.

[Horizon]

You promised cookies, implying more than one whole cookie. I want my cookies, damnit!

[snowyowl]

In my experience, the plural only refers to any quantity other than 1. "One cookie", "two cookies", "three cookies", "no cookies", "0.01 cookies", "3x + 2 cookies".

Constructions like "half of a cookie" or "three-quarters of a cookie" are the exception, but only because they should be parsed as (three-quarters of (one cookie)) - the singular still refers to a single cookie.

[Globus]

That's what I meant to ask about. My faith about my English knowledge is now restored. Also, I'm bound to make some noobish grammar mistake in a post like this.

[snowyowl]

It's not the same in all languages, btw. In French, zero is singular.

Anyway, I must insist that although I'm clearly violating the spirit of our agreement while sticking to the letter, Horizon started it.

[Globus]

It's not the same in all languages, btw. In French, zero is singular.

Yeah, well, I don't speak French, but I'd like to think I'm pretty good at English.

[Horizon]

Well, globus, I can tell you that you're better at using english than some native english speakers I know.

[Jub3r7]

One theory I've had presented to me when I wanted to change something in the past was that I would find myself in an alternate timeline where I did change the past and not forget part of my audition, but that I would also leave behind a whole other timeline where I did forget and a version of me that never made the decision to change what happened.

According to the person who presented this idea to me, time-traveling is considered a really selfish act since it only effects the person doing it and if the event being changed is supposed to help others, it really doesn't and simply places you in an alternate timeline where that event is/was changed.

e: (In the end, I decided not to time travel, but then again maybe I'm just the version that was left behind.)

[Alex Starkiller]

According to the person who presented this idea to me, time-traveling is considered a really selfish act since it only effects the person doing it and if the event being changed is supposed to help others, it really doesn't and simply places you in an alternate timeline where that event is/was changed.

e: (In the end, I decided not to time travel, but then again maybe I'm just the version that was left behind.)

But is that bad? Is that really all that selfish? Because the people who's lives you've improved or changed are as real as the people who's lives can't be changed. They'd have good lives because of you, even if it's impossible for another reality to have that occur.

[Jub3r7]

I don't know if it's bad, but I think they considered it selfish because apparently you are the only one who is affected.