Random thought about life

1« Previous thread | Next thread »
- Qtian
- Pub Regular
- offline
Random thought about life
OP - April 20, 2014, 11:37 AM

This is just a thought, but do you think that labels such as "smoking kills" are unintentionally wrong?

For instance, If I smoke 40 a day, it is very likely that I will die before someone who does not smoke (based on statistics).

However, what if we think about it this way:

- Every cigarette supposedly takes away "x minutes" from your life.
- This means that every cigarette potentially increases the arrival of your death at an accelerated rate.

So the act of smoking is a strictly increasing function with reference to death, the more you smoke, the quicker your death should come.

However, this is where the label "smoking kills" is wrong in my opinion. If smoking kills you, you are dead.
You are then dead, relative to non-death, which is life... since we have to assume that we exist.
So your death on the most basic level is then a result of your life (of course this is an assumption we can't escape).

But what I'm trying to say, on a basic level... our death is an inevitable result of life as we are mere mortals.
So I think it is more appropriate to say that "smoking kills you faster" as opposed to the absolutist statement of "smoking kills".

Of course, this is with direct reference to smoking, as it is generally done in increments, I'm not trying to generalise this to something else. E.g. if you get head shot by a sniper, you would most likely drop dead, so there is no incremental "decay" of life involved.

What are your thoughts?

http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/marlboro-smoking-kills.jpg

My mind runs, I can never catch it even if I get a head start.
- TheDashingRabbit
- Politics and Literature Junkie
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Random thought about life
Reply #1 - April 20, 2014, 11:54 AM

It also reduces the quality of your life.

Shortness of breath, you can't run a marathon etc.

In my opinion a life without curiosity is not a life worth living
- Qtian
- Pub Regular
- offline
Random thought about life
Reply #2 - April 20, 2014, 11:56 AM

Yep. I was just thinking about the notion that "smoking kills" vs "smoking kills you faster". The latter is a more appropriate analysis in my opinion.

My mind runs, I can never catch it even if I get a head start.
- Descent
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Random thought about life
Reply #3 - April 20, 2014, 12:10 PM

Well, I think smoking only indirectly kills you (correct me if I'm wrong) so "smoking kills" is not really an appropriate term. Shouldn't it be:

"Smoking causes an increase in the chance of various diseases, most notably lung cancer which can kill you"?

I suppose it doesn't have the same ring to it.
- Qtian
- Pub Regular
- offline
Random thought about life
Reply #4 - April 20, 2014, 12:13 PM

Exactly, they probably don't address our statements on cigarette cartons because "smoking kills" has a more persuasive ring to it.
Just an extra note, I was trying to address ""smoking kills" through the logic that is used to make that statement.

E.g. The argument should be as follows:

If you smoke for an extended period of time, you may trigger certain conditions which increase the chance of your death coming more quickly.
You smoke,
Therefore you may trigger certain conditions which increase the chance of your death coming more quickly.

The "cigarette carton" argument is something like this:
"TITLE IN LARGE FONT STATING THAT SMOKING KILLS"
If you smoke, you will die
you smoke,
Therefore you will die.
(insert image of a dilapidated lung or some other organ which now seems vestigial)

My thoughts were addressing the second argument, e.g. "if you smoke, you will die" vs "If you are born, you will eventually die".
I just think that the statement made is very superficial.

My mind runs, I can never catch it even if I get a head start.
- Cornflower
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Random thought about life
Reply #5 - April 20, 2014, 12:35 PM

They probably use the "smoking kills" sign for two reasons: 1) it is short and will thus fit nicely on the cigarette package, and people will immediately see what it says without having to bother to read out a long sentence. 2) It is a powerful statement that perhaps is not "logically" correct as you've pointed out, but that conveys the overall message and reality that smoking will in most cases lead to a premature death or sickness and health complications that you otherwise would not have suffered from if you were not a smoker/second-hand smoker.

The "smoking kills you faster" will perhaps not convey the seriousness of the issue.

"The healthiest people I know are those who are the first to label themselves fucked up." - three
- Qtian
- Pub Regular
- offline
Random thought about life
Reply #6 - April 20, 2014, 12:40 PM

Thanks for your input Cornflower. As you have correctly pointed out, my thoughts were just dealing with "Smoking kills" in terms of the logic behind this claim.

My mind runs, I can never catch it even if I get a head start.
1« Previous thread | Next thread »