English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Please don't be fooled by the simplicity of the question.
10 points for the best answer.

2007-03-08 04:46:22 · 19 answers · asked by Kuky 1 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

19 answers

human arrogance leading to irreversible error!

2007-03-08 04:52:54 · answer #1 · answered by jkk k 3 · 1 1

The real problem during that disaster was that the iceberg was only sighted 37 seconds before they hit it. If they had even a few minutes warning, everything might have turned out differently.

Of course, there are reasons why it wasn't seen earlier. There was no moon that night to provide light and worse yet the dark side of the iceberg was facing the ship. The lookouts didn't have binoculars. Even a little wind would have helped make things stand out, but that was completely absent too.

The captain had already acknolwedged an awareness of the danger by changing course once in hope of avoiding icebergs, and had been recieving regular warnings as well. What's more, he had piloted similarly sized craft before and even had collisions in them... he of all people would presumably know how difficult it would be to stop the ship. It would seem that an experienced captain who was aware of the shortcomings of his lookouts would normally have slowed down, just as a good car driver would normally slow down if rain lowered visibility or snow increased stopping distance. Other ships in the area had stopped moving altogether to wait until morning.

But he did not do this.

Which leaves only the question of why. On most nights, the precautions they had taken would have been enough. One of the fallouts of the disaster were modified safety rules. I don't think it's merited to call the captain a direct fool. There were suggestions afterward even that the ship was travelling not just at normal speed, but rather above even that.

So what force could make a normally competent captain behave in the manner of someone ignorant of safety precautions? The most obvious answer is his land-lubber boss. This is a frequently-forwarded theory, and it certainly seems plausible enough.

And if that was the case, the answer to your question is probably greed, ego, and plausible deniability.

I don't think any sane captain would truly believe himself invulnerable, especially after the accidents that this one had previously... thus the idea that he believed the hype about unsinkability is too implausible to be believed.

2007-03-08 14:41:52 · answer #2 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 0 0

when the Titanic was designed, it was made to stay afloat if the first four water tight bulkheads were full, thus making it seem "unsinkable." However, when it hit a 'berg on that night, it filled up 5+ watertight bulkheads, thus not being able to stay afloat. If the captain hit it head on, the bow would of crumbled, but the time for it to sink would take a lot longer, more lives would be saved, etc. And no matter what your ship is made of, it's not unsinkable. It was made of iron and steel, like many ships, but that does not make any ship unsinkable. The builders deemed in "unsinkable" because of the pride they took in it in the early technology of the early 20th century, and many believed it would be the best and the fastest.

New evidence shows that it also was struck from the bottom of the ship from the iceberg, thus allowing water to rise up faster than it was coming in.

The loss of life was due to the shortage of lifeboats, which was 8 starboard, 8 port, and then 4 collapsable boats (think little rafts) for a grand total of 20. It was planned to have 64 followed by 32 then 16 with 4 more was the final solution.

2007-03-08 12:51:17 · answer #3 · answered by proud_mom 5 · 0 0

The Titanic was forward at a normal pace in the north Atlantic, an iceberg was spotted straight ahead. Instead of going straight, it turned to the left. The iceberg hit the side of the ship and cut wholes into several compartments. The water tight doors closed, but too many compartments filled with water and it could not stay a float. The sinking started in the front of the ship, it slowly sank vertically untill the back half broke off. The back half THAN started filling with water, and went down vertically, but slowly. It took about 10 minutes for the back half to sink.

2007-03-08 20:11:14 · answer #4 · answered by g_mcmurran 2 · 0 0

PEOPLE sank the Titanic no man made object can do anythink on its own it has to be influenced by man think about it no house hold object does anythink itself it was sculptured to forefill mans needs even if it has the illusion its doing something on its own a light bulb isn't lighting you room man is he created it to forfill his needs it works how man made it work and that is the basic principle of every man made object .Whenever a man made object goes wrong like a plane or car and this results in death or injury its because someone didn't make it work someone is aways to blame it was someone ignorance or stupidity that the object failed to to its job

2007-03-08 14:53:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Titanic was thought to be unsinkable and i think they tempted fate saying that lik come on what are the chances that one of the best ships ever made would hit an iceberg!! Nature's way of putting us in our place

2007-03-08 13:37:28 · answer #6 · answered by Winkwnink 4 · 0 0

Ultimately.... Gravity. The weight of the ship overcame the resistant force of buoyancy when the structure of the ship was compromised.

2007-03-08 13:23:49 · answer #7 · answered by Shaman 7 · 0 0

Hubris

2007-03-08 13:45:13 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 1 0

Gravity.

2007-03-08 13:20:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

simple... water.. an ice berg made it crack in 2 ... right?.. but when so much weight (water and people) it sank... the water filled the ship makeing it the ship.. sink.. the people just added extra weight...

2007-03-08 13:00:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

human ego sunk such a amazing craft. they showed off by pushing her to her limits of speed. such a sad way for such an amazing craft to end. humans do in the end ruin amazing things. it's strange how we can make so many great things but our pride ends up tearing them down.

2007-03-08 14:05:50 · answer #11 · answered by Chrysanthi W 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers