After
watching the video of Greg's logic i think that in my opinion it simplifies the
way to decide what to decide if a problem arises. this logic is very good and
it is also used by businesses to solve conflicts. in this video Greg chooses
option "A" over option "B" because he thinks that if we
choose option "B" and do not take any step to prevent the disaster
and it takes place then it might be a catastrophic disaster which may cost many
lives. he says we can use the money to prevent and then it happens rather that
not spending money and it happens.
however
because there is a 50 - 50 chance for the disaster to happen or not to happen ,
if they spend the money and it happens then well and good but if it does not
happen then million's and million's of dollars are wasted which money could be
used on something else like education , food , poverty etc
he
logic of Greg's theory is that it gives you possibilities example;
when
there is an attack in East African Countries by Terrorist group called
Al-Shabab then the rest of the world is adivsied not to travel to those
countries this could be a disaster to the country because there will be a
crisis in there tourism industry.
|
Al -shabab Attacking East Africa
|
Going to East African Countries
|
Not Going to East African Countries
|
|
Attack happens
|
Losing their lives.
|
Saved their lives from the attack by
not traveling to East Africa.
|
|
Attack Does not happen
|
Enjoying their holidays and the
beauty of East Africa.
|
Spoiling their holidays and not
getting a chance to visit the beauty of East Africa .
|
