Have there been any books dealing with the ethics of using time travel?
For example, someone with time travel capability goes back in time and wins a lottery. Hasn’t that person essentially stolen that money from the future winner?
I know there’s been lots of stuff about killing Hisler and such, I don’t mean something action oriented, just a real reasoned, thought provoking look.
How do you know he wasn’t the winner in the first place? He won the contest in the past (maybe even before he was born), then goes back in time, buys the ticket, fulfills the past.
David Gerrold’s The Man Who Folded Himself almost certainly touches on this; it touches on just about any time travel theme imaginable.
That’s a good point.
While I don’t know of any book that does so, if I’m not mistaken, the movie Hot Tub Time Machine I think brings up that ethic at the end of the film, where the one character stayed in the past and used his knowledge of the future for his selfish means. I think the other characters bring up that ethical point.
Though I’ve only seen the film once, when it was released in the theater, so I could be misremembering.
Orson Douchecanoe Card’s Pastwatch has (IIRC) people taking a vote to decide on whether to make a change a few hundred years in the past that would wipe out those hundreds of years of history (but hopefully result in a better alternate timeline.)
I don’t think anyone’s done a better job of the issues than Heinlein, in short form, and Gerrold, in compact form. The longer books muddle it up so much.
Those would be “All You Zombies–” and its longer iteration-by-inspiration, The Man Who Folded Himself.
The time police will come after you.
Back To The Future 2 shows the ethical problem with time travel and gambling.
Funny you mention that movie, because we had a brief discussion here about a different ethical issue it raised. Person A travels to the past, stuff happens, and when they return to the future, everything has changed - new house, new wife, etc. So presumably in this timeline, they are a different person with different memories - call it Person A-2. However, the old version of themselves (Person A-1) now replaces A-2. What happened to A-2? Gone, annihilated. Is that ethical?
I’d think there must be books that touch on that aspect, but I’m not familiar with any.
What makes you think Person A-1 would be the one that would still exist? If they do, then they didn’t actually change history.
In these movies (Hot Tub Time Machine, Back to the Future, countless others), the person returning is always shown to be the “original” who is a bit baffled by their new circumstance. Before they arrived back, there was presumably a person occupying that same body who no longer exists.
If you’re talking about more general time travel outside of these movie examples, well, there are a lot more parameters to establish.
Playing upon that same theme, in Back to the Future the consequence of changing history, Marty accidentally displacing George from being hurt by Lorraine’s father, so she doesn’t fall for him (the Florence Nightingale effect) is evident throughout the whole film with the disappearing images on the photograph. We’re constantly aware that if things aren’t set right Marty will cease to exist.
Marty fixes that, but by doing so George and Lorraine are changed people, they’re now more confident and become happier, more successful people. So why didn’t Marty change as well?
If by accidentally stopping his mother and father falling in love would have had a permanent effect on Marty (not existing is pretty permanent) then once George & Lorraine gained the confidence and started out as a happy, successful couple, shouldn’t Marty have permanently “changed” into the son of such a couple, forgetting all about a miserable past?
That’s one of the reasons Back to the Future II is strange. Shouldn’t Marty have arrived to a 2015 where he and Jennifer had disappeared 30 years earlier?
There is also Up the Line by Robert Silverberg, which involves an ethical problem that I can’t describe without giving spoilers.
You mustn’t interfere with the past. Don’t do anything that affects anything. Unless it turns out that you were supposed to do it; in which case, for the love of God, don’t not do it!
When I was thinking about it, I imagined a potential time-traveller seeing the winning numbers then using his device/ability to go back and set himself up.
I’ve heard of David Gerrold but not the book you mentioned, I’ll give it a look.
Obviously, this was just something that popped into my noggin and again just as obviously, I thought of asking the dope first.
Cool, another one for the list.
Slight hijack: in THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT, our hero is briefly baffled every time he pops back to the new-circumstances present – and then, shortly thereafter, he gets hit with both sets of memories, adding the lived-through-that stuff to the “original” stuff.
This also serves as something of a limit on his time-travel capabilities, because, hey, double the memories is hard, but with triple you’re risking brain damage – and if you keep trying to improve the present, “risking” isn’t the right word.
The Man Who Folded Himself is one of my favorite time travel stories, along with Up The Line. (Alongside Palimpsest by Charles Stross, and Doomsday Book by Connie Willis, and the lighter The Flight of the Horse collection by Larry Niven.)
No? Not unless they never go back… to the present.
Another recommendation for “The Man Who Folded Himself”. Gerrold sends up every cliche of the time travel sub-genre and does it quite smashingly.
Poul Anderson frequently dealt with ethical problems in his “Time Patrol” stories (particularly in “Delenda Est” Delenda Est - Wikipedia and “Shield of Time”) both of which touch on cost of preserving the “right” time line, by erasing the people that live in the far future of the alternate time line (if you can find them, see also Warren Salomon’s “Time Private Eye” stories). You might also like “Bones of the Earth” by Michael Swanwick (or the short story that was later expanded into it "Scherzo with Tyrannosaur ").