In a post I wrote here back on July 18, 2023, I argued that the Titan submersible accident was “diagnostic of the delusions of our society.” Here’s the first paragraph of the post, emphasis added:

The response to the Titan submersible event has, in my view, been both remarkable and bizarre. Some people have found it an occasion for gallows humor; others have tried to suggest that the crew/passengers felt no suffering as they died. Still others tell us that we should celebrate the heroism of people who take risks to explore the unknown, and point out that civilization itself depends on its bold risk takers. I find all three of these reactions delusional, and diagnostic of the delusions of our society.

It turns out that I was wrong (or likely wrong) about the italicized clause, and that David Potts, who commented on the post, was right.

The US Coast Guard initiated an inquiry into the Titan accident back in 2023, and held two weeks of public hearings on the subject this past September. Though the inquiry has yet to reach any final conclusions or issue its final report, it has amassed enough evidence to pass judgment on the initial journalistic (and blogospheric) reactions to the event. It now appears that the crew of the Titan was likely unaware of what was about to happen to them, and probably died instantaneously, without experiencing any suffering.

In making the contrary claim, I relied too heavily in my post on an article in The New Zealand Herald, quoting a Spanish submarine expert, José Louis Martín, as well as a slew of similar articles I read at the time. Like many other experts quoted at the time, Martín was under the false impression that the crew’s release of two weights during its descent was an indication that it (the crew) had foreknowledge of the imminent implosion, and that the subsequent descent was a free fall during which they were aware of their imminent deaths.

The Coast Guard hearings make clear that this was all wrong. The release of the two weights was most likely intended to stabilize the craft, not to bring it to the surface. There is no indication that the crew thought there was any urgent need to rise to the surface. Though the Coast Guard hearings do not literally rule out the possibility of suffering, they make Martín’s scenario highly implausible. There is, in any case, no positive evidence of suffering, and no strong reason to believe that the crew suffered. So my ascription of “delusion” to others was ill-taken.

Having conceded that much, I remain convinced of most of the rest of what I said, and the Coast Guard hearings reinforce this. It is possible that some of the accusations made against OceanGate and Stockton Rush will be overturned or mitigated, but right now, the evidence looks pretty damning. Two headlines in The New York Times convey the basic thought: “Titan Submersible Company Neglected Safety Concerns, Ex-Employees Say,” and “Ex-OceanGate Employee’s Remarks Hint at Titan Disaster Lawsuits to Come.” I won’t try to summarize the contents except to say that they justify my criticisms of OceanGate and Rush. From the second article: “OceanGate’s lack of rigor and integrity…amounted to ‘technical malfeasance.’”

And yet. The evidence may not justify my implicit criticisms of some of the passengers, whose survivors now claim with some plausibility that they (the passengers) were misled into boarding the craft:

Mr. Nargeolet’s family sued OceanGate last month [meaning, in August 2024], saying that the company’s chief executive had misled Mr. Nargolet about the craft’s safety. OceanGate suspended commercial and exploratory operations in the wake of the accident.

All in all, I should have known better than to rely so heavily on contemporary press reports, a criticism of the post Potts himself had made at the time. A cautionary tale in more ways than one.