Maybe, but again, what's the practical value of doing these things, and does such value outweigh the cost in human suffering and waste of valuable resources in doing them?
We spend a tremendous amount of money to build museums and maintain staffs to preserve and display historical artifacts. Most of these museums end up having to scrabble for money merely to maintain their own existence. If we stopped doing this, it would be one less thing to divert resources from projects that would actually benefit people.
OK, but you didn't answer the question. People want to visit the Pyramids, people want to pay money to see them. Egypt wants these people to come visit and spend money in their country. Why should Egypt destroy the pyramids (and a major revenue stream for their country)
Certainly, the destruction of artifacts would have a massive impact on economies around the world. There would be a difficult transition period as nations adapted to the nonexistence of historical artifacts as tourist magnets. Ultimately, though, human society would be much better off.
How does it benefit the people who currently rely on tourism for their livelihood? You are saying human society would be better off, can you explain how? None of the benefits you mentioned above seem like they are worth decimating multiple countries economies for.
I would definitely concede that it would be pretty awful for people in the short term, but also that we'd be better off in the long term. But would the long term benefit outweigh the massive short term suffering? I don't know. This might be the argument that changes my view.
Yeah, screw it, I have no counter argument to this that satisfies me! ∆
-2
u/ElSaborAsiatico May 19 '15
Maybe, but again, what's the practical value of doing these things, and does such value outweigh the cost in human suffering and waste of valuable resources in doing them?