A couple days ago, I posted something about “underthinking” and how I thought is was sad that this was what our society was coming to. However, I must note that I was reminded that sometimes “underthinking” is better, in cases like picking toothpaste, etc.But that said, today when I visited the Schlitterbahn water park in Galveston, I was excited to see the amount of deep thinking that must have been required to build this or any other water/amusement park. Of course, this doesn’t mean that they are flawless as we have all heard about the various mishaps that have occurred on roller coaster, etc. But it does show the application and success brought by deep thought. If someone had “underthought” a water slide, in anyway such as the support beams or length or slope or curve style, I wouldn’t have been able to have had the amusement that I had today. If these slides weren’t designed perfectly for the target audience, or even beyond perfectly with extra cautionary measures, so many accidents could have happened. And this brings me to my next point, we know that millions of people ride roller coasters everyday, and they come out perfectly safe. But, as I mentioned, we also know that these machines are subject to malfunction and wear and tear. But, overall we know that the risk on anyone of these roller coasters is pretty low. But, what is the amount of risk one can take with their own life? What is too much? I guess this is just a different way of asking what is the value of life? Sure everyone may value their lives differently, and will expose themselves to different levels of risk. But as a society, is there any amount of risk towards life that we can accept? Cities, states and nations provide regulations for everything, including houses, stores, amusement parks and pollution, in order to minimize the risk towards humans or other forms of life as the case might be. So who is to say that the risk that roller coasters present is too much or too little? The answer here, in my opinion, is not that people subject themselves to roller coasters willingly and so ultimately the decision depends upon each person, because a person may decide that living in a building infested with asbestos is perfectly fine, yet regulations don’t allow that to happen. The answer here, I think, must be a certain probability of accident that society deems to be low enough to subject people to. So, how do we come up with this probability?