Is Singlehanding >24 Hrs. Morally Wrong?

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by skipmac

NOTE: Please read carefully and you will see that I did not comment on whether or not singlehanding is moral or not, only that the logic used to justify the morality was invalid.

"Logic" and "Morality" are two mutually exclusive concepts.

[john61ct]

Striving to eliminate or even reduce life's risks, should not be a high priority for those who want to really live fully.

And of course taking risks often increases risks to others.

What is Moral or not is ultimately up to each individual's conscience.

Personally I think human life is grossly overvalued, way too many of us here on the planet,

IMO it would be much better for the species if we allowed Darwinian evolution to operate more freely in our daily lives.

[DumnMad]

Navruleshandbook states regarding proper lookout;
The term, as used by the Rules, denotes not a person but rather the systematic collection of information...........and the purpose is to avoid collision.

Don't have to have all means operating all the time. e.g. Your batteries are down so you turn the radar off to save the more important facilities of AIS and radio. Or, the crew needs respite due to bad weather so hove-to, turn on all alarms and go below. Solo or fully crewed it doesn't matter.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by skipmac

I would add that the logic is flawed in another way. Just because people do something, even if it is a lot of people that are doing it AND other people approve of what is done, does not make that action moral.
........

I'm curious, if it isn't people who are the arbiters of morally, just who/what are the arbiters.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by DumnMad

Navruleshandbook states regarding proper lookout;
The term, as used by the Rules, denotes not a person but rather the systematic collection of information...........and the purpose is to avoid collision.

Don't have to have all means operating all the time. e.g. Your batteries are down so you turn the radar off to save the more important facilities of AIS and radio. Or, the crew needs respite due to bad weather so hove-to, turn on all alarms and go below. Solo or fully crewed it doesn't matter.

But what good does systematically collecting information do if there is no one awake onboard to process and use that information that’s collected? As you say, the purpose is to avoid collision but how do you use info to avoid collision when you’re asleep?

You’re also right that you don’t have to have all means operating at the same time. Instead, rule 5 says that you must use sight and hearing at all times, and also use other means when appropriate to accurately appraise the situation and risk of collision. I think we can all agree that our ability to appraise situations and risk of collision isn’t at its best while we’re sawing logs.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I'm curious, if it isn't people who are the arbiters of morally, just who/what are the arbiters.

Hi Wottie,
Morality statements are "value" judgements that have no actual or independent proof of being true, (other than the enthusiasm of the judges).

For some preposition to be held true in the strictest Philosophical sense it needs to be held as being factual independent of beliefs or strong opinions. (No matter how popular)

This primer and associated links on the ground rules of discussing things like morality, would save us all a lot of drama, if universally understood! [emoji4]

https://www.iep.utm.edu/apriori/

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Hi Wottie,
Morality statements are "value" judgements that have no actual or independent proof of being true, (other than the enthusiasm of the judges).

For some preposition to be held true in the strictest Philosophical sense it needs to be held as being factual independent of beliefs or strong opinions. (No matter how popular)

This primer and associated links on the ground rules of discussing things like morality, would save us all a lot of drama, if universally understood! [emoji4]

https://www.iep.utm.edu/apriori/

Yep, I get this approach however Skipmac's post seemed to say to me that morality was a concept that was divorced of human involvement but perhaps I misunderstood what he was saying.

If it isn't somehow connected to human thought then perhaps I should look towards my neighbours pet rock for a moral compass or perhaps a village dog in South America or whatever.

[Saleen411]

YES...single handing is immoral! Sleeping alone is immoral! Sailing alone is immoral!

Occasional short term single handing is OK....Being a dedicated, "I'm a single hander" sail for years ALONE is whack. Seriously.

EXCEPT if you're Boatie...he gets a pass ...just because.....

[Mr B]

Originally Posted by Saleen411

YES...single handing is immoral! Sleeping alone is immoral! Sailing alone is immoral!

Occasional short term single handing is OK....Being a dedicated, "I'm a single hander" sail for years ALONE is whack. Seriously.

EXCEPT if you're Boatie...he gets a pass ...just because.....

That only applies to the people that need a crowd around them,
Ones that need a cheer squad, Hahahaha

Single handers dont need a crowd, Some one to talk too, Companionship,
Radio contact, Can fix their own boats,
They actually like being on their own, Some thing the crowd just cant handle or comprehend, ,

[OldManMirage]

My point about being in the Navy was simply that I have been in situations where many sets of eyes have missed things. You cannot somehow assume that you are safer just because you have someone on watch. You may THINK you are, or FEEL that you are, but the reality is you are not.


Commercial and military vessels miss things all the time with full crews and sophisticated equipment. A small sailboat down in the waves with a watch-stander glancing around every few minutes will miss much more.


Again, in my opinion, this is NOT a moral issue, its a personal risk issue. ANY of us who go to sea in a small boat potentially put others at risk. Its simply a matter of degree. You are certainly more at risk from the partially submerged container floating around than you are from the single-hander who is sleeping. If you are keeping your theoretical "perfect" watch you will see the sailboat long before you see the container.


Morality is not involved. You may as well ask "Is it moral for me to spend $400,000 on a yacht to go sailing off and enjoy myself while there are people and children starving to death ?" THAT question has more to do with morals than the current discussion.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Mr B

That only applies to the people that need a crowd around them,
Ones that need a cheer squad, Hahahaha

Single handers dont need a crowd, Some one to talk too, Companionship,
Radio contact, Can fix their own boats,
They actually like being on their own, Some thing the crowd just cant handle or comprehend, ,

Yup! [emoji4]

https://youtu.be/5AvwHZF0RAc

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

"Logic" and "Morality" are two mutually exclusive concepts.

Now here is a subject that could get into a deep discussion (and major thread drift).

One could argue that morality is logical because a moral society will arguably result in better living conditions for all, including oneself. If it is considered immoral to steal and a society adheres to that morality then it is less likely that your stuff will be stolen.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by OldManMirage

You may as well ask "Is it moral for me to spend $400,000 on a yacht to go sailing off and enjoy myself while there are people and children starving to death ?" THAT question has more to do with morals than the current discussion.

Given the way "morality" is being used in this discussion, I think the relevant questions are:

#1 is "immorality" binary (eg yes or no - rather than a spectrum of levels) - I personally would say that it is definitely not binary (eg driving over the speed limit is a very low level of immorality while the holocaust is a high level)

and #2 at what point "immoral" = "don't do". It is "Immoral" to drive faster than the speed limit, to be overweight (which places a healthcare burden on the rest of society), to get drunk, and many many other relatively common things which place a slight extra burden or risk on society; some of which I rather suspect many of the people here do, including those who are saying singlehanding is immoral.

As I said way way back up thread . . . . the incremental risks which single handers are creating for others are infinitesimal (based on empirical facts). So, from at least one perspective that means the amount of "immorality" is infinitesimal and thus probably should be 'acceptable in common practice" to those who also drive over the speed limit, are overweight or who occasionally get drunk.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by OldManMirage

My point about being in the Navy was simply that I have been in situations where many sets of eyes have missed things. You cannot somehow assume that you are safer just because you have someone on watch. You may THINK you are, or FEEL that you are, but the reality is you are not.


Commercial and military vessels miss things all the time with full crews and sophisticated equipment. A small sailboat down in the waves with a watch-stander glancing around every few minutes will miss much more.

. . .

I understood what you meant, and I agree with you. It is a more subtle point than many understood. I especially like the part which I have underlined above.


Good watchkeeping is really important, and I'm a stickler for it on my boat. I demand that watchkeepers spend a significant amount of their time on watch actually looking out, and that they do it systematically, and in different patterns depending on where we are and what are the circumstances. In some circumstances, I ask people to look out as if they were driving a car. I have had trouble getting some crew to accept this approach, which is more rigorous than what is often practiced on pleasure vessels.


HOWEVER, notwithstanding all of that, I completely and totally agree with what OldManMirage has written about this. Good watchkeeping is a necessary BUT NOT SUFFICIENT condition to safe navigation. Radar guard zones -- on a system properly tuned and adjusted -- and AIS alarms, plus depth alarms intelligently used, proper use of a chart plotter, proper passage planning -- are even more important than proper watchkeeping, in my view. As OldManMirage has written -- eyeballs alone, even lots of them on a very well resourced vessel like a U.S. Navy vessel, will miss a lot of things, no matter how well trained and managed they are. I'm not even talking about sailing at night.



Therefore, I agree with him that proper use of technology is essential, at least no less important than proper watchkeeping.


Which leads me to my opinion about single-handing, which may seem paradoxical to some -- I really don't condemn it, although it is a clear violation of the COLREGS in my opinion, and although I consider good watchkeeping to be extremely important in any case. A single-hander managing his passage with intelligence and diligence, and using radar and AIS with intelligence and diligence, is in my opinion far safer than the typical yacht with the crew having a party in the cockpit, or reading books or staring out into space, neither keeping a good visual watch nor having employed their technology with any real skill. Despite the lapses in watchkeeping which are inevitable when you are so severely undermanned. As OldManMirage so well stated -- just having someone in the cockpit nominally on watch means hardly anything; even a decent visual watch can give a false feeling of security. Proper awareness and detection of potential collisions and other hazards is a complex, systematic problem with no simple out-of-the-box solution.




I am writing this looking out at a boat across the pontoon which was run down by a 10,000 GRT box ship just last week, and which miraculously did not sink. Mast and rigging are mangled, and there is a huge hole in the side covered by tarps. This happened in the vast emptiness of the high North Atlantic where I am now, with little traffic of any kind. Kind of drives home the point of how important this process is. It's not a theoretical issue at all.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

although it is a clear violation of the COLREGS

DH, you are a stickler for precision in these matters - so let me be picky and correct you here . . . Singlehanding does not per say violate the COLREGS at all. There is only a violation if/when improper watchkeeping happens.