 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / February 2010"Worst case scenario": proposed adjustment
The phrase "worst case scenario" is often used, though the scenario indicated by it is sometimes so unlikely that it is scarcely worth considering. By definition, the "worst case" is an extreme: it contains the most horrid tip of the bell curve of possible events. To make the phrase "worst case scenario" more useful, I propose the we prefix a percentage to it, such as: "the 5% worst case scenario" What such a phrase would mean is "the worst case scenario that has at *least* a 5% chance of happening" (within a specified situation and time-frame). An example: the likelihood that (within our lifetimes) a meteor might strike the Earth in such a way that 30% of the human population would die is far less than 5%. It would not be the "5% worst case scenario." However, the likelihood that some natural disaster, genocide, or war might result in the unexpected deaths of 1 million or more persons (in the next 50 years somewhere on Earth, and within the time-frame of 6 contiguous months) is probably significantly greater than 5%. (The extremely sad news out of Haiti is evidence that events approaching this scale do happen.) Sadly, this would be a candidate for a "5% worst case scenario" for the human population in the situation and time described. Any thoughts you might have on this are most welcome.... (By the way, if you would like to help the sad people in Haiti, you might check out the "Charity Navigator" comparisons of charities which are providing relief, along with charities addressing other important issues): http://www.charitynavigator.org/ -- Brett (in Berkeley, California, USA) http://www.electoralmaps.org/ Pictorial election results for every U.S. Presidential Election from George Washington to Barack Obama. > The phrase "worst case scenario" is often used, though the scenario > indicated by it is sometimes so unlikely that it is scarcely worth [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > "the 5% worst case scenario" We already have a plethora of such terms, many of which begin "twenty- year...", though the 1% case is a bit more, uh, "storied": 100-year flood http://geography.about.com/library/faq/blqz100yearflood.htm It doesn't help to make a phrase "more useful" if you simultaneously make it so ugly that nobody would use it at all. Just try saying "the five percent worst-case scenario" out loud. Ick. And then it isn't "worst" any more. No: fact is, I hate it. I think the concept of percent is perhaps too hard for the average person to understand intuitively. They'll misunderstand the x-year phrases, too, but at least they will *think* they understand them. Jim Deutch (JimboCat) -- "We live in an age where True Names give you power (where a True Name is one close enough to the correct spelling that Google knows what you mean.)" [David M. Palmer] >> The phrase "worst case scenario" is often used, though the scenario >> indicated by it is sometimes so unlikely that it is scarcely worth [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > person to understand intuitively. They'll misunderstand the x-year > phrases, too, but at least they will *think* they understand them. I just wish they'd stop calling it a "scenario".  SignatureMike. >>> The phrase "worst case scenario" is often used, though the scenario >>> indicated by it is sometimes so unlikely that it is scarcely worth [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >> > I just wish they'd stop calling it a "scenario". I agree. 'The worst case imaginable' always sounds better to me. >"Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> I just wish they'd stop calling it a "scenario". > >I agree. 'The worst case imaginable' always sounds better to me. No doubt. But even though it may be unpleasant to imagine it, a scenario to go with it is more useful to help one to cope with it. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk >The phrase "worst case scenario" is often used, though the scenario >indicated by it is sometimes so unlikely that it is scarcely worth [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > >http://www.charitynavigator.org/ First, you need a framework to define the word "worst". "Most horrid" just begs the question. Then, you've specified 50 years, 1 million people, and a "time frame" of six months, but those specifications don't appear in your 5% phrase, and there's nothing uniquely suitable about those particular parameter values. There may be some uses of "worst case scenario" that need improvement, but it's unlikely that substituting an equally under-specified phrase will supply it. Actually, a number giving it a false specificity is worse than the original vagueness. SignatureJohn > First, you need a framework to define the word "worst". "Most horrid" >just begs the question. Then, you've specified 50 years, 1 million [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >under-specified phrase will supply it. Actually, a number giving it a >false specificity is worse than the original vagueness. A worst-case scenario operates on the assumption that if anything can go wrong, it will. Say an earthquake, with lots of collapsed buildings. You need heavy lifting equipment, but the harbour entrance is blocked, the roads are blocked, and the airport runways are blocked. Yopu need fresh water, but the pipes are broken, and the sewers have broken spilling sewage into the only river that used to have potable water. You need blood for transfusions, but most of the population are HIV positive and the testing equipment got carried off when the boat bringing it it was swamped in heavy surf. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk Steve Hayes filted: >A worst-case scenario operates on the assumption that if anything can go >wrong, it will. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >and the testing equipment got carried off when the boat bringing it it was >swamped in heavy surf. Is that what's troublin' you, friend?... Lift your head up high and take a walk in the sun with that dignity and stick-to-it-iveness!...and you *show* the world!...you *show* them where to get off!... You'll never give up!...never give up!...never give up -- that ship!...r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? Berkeley Brett skrev: > The phrase "worst case scenario" is often used, though the scenario > indicated by it is sometimes so unlikely that it is scarcely worth > considering. But scenarios scarcely worth considering are somtimes worth considering. If the consequences of the worst case scenario are horrible and can be avoided with almost no drawbacks, that would be a wise move. Programmers for example often have to deal with worst case scenarios - however unlikely they may be. We do not want a bank's central computer to enter an infinite loop in ther middle of a crucial transaction. > To make the phrase "worst case scenario" more useful, It can hardly become more useful to me than it already is. SignatureBertel, Denmark > Berkeley Brett skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > It can hardly become more useful to me than it already is. It needs one adjustment: a hyphen. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) >Berkeley Brett skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >central computer to enter an infinite loop in ther middle of a >crucial transaction. In the past the nuclear power industry has had a tendency to decide that some potentially catastrophic scenarios are too extreme to actually take account of. Yellowstone super-volcano is a good worst case scenario. Every now and then it erupts and destroys a very large area, but in the past there hasn't been a modern nation built up around Yellowstone. Another series of New Madrid earthquakes would be another such case. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * > The phrase "worst case scenario" is often used, though the scenario > indicated by it is sometimes so unlikely that it is scarcely worth > considering. Well, worst does actually mean worst. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.