Poll: Your Pet is Drowning, and so is a Stranger.

[Pandabearparade]

Dick Cheney: Would not save
Small child: Would save

I can respect that. Hell, I wouldn't save Dick Cheney even if no dog was present.

 

[DugMachine]

I live by the general rule "Expect the best, but prepare for the worst." That way, I don't seem like a judgmental prick but am still rarely caught off guard when things go wrong.

A pet is stuck being a pet. It can never become anything more a non-sapient animal, a slave to its instincts.
It will never found and run it's own company because it can't.
It will never make great breakthroughs in science or medicine because it can't.
A pet can't help change the world.
A pet could also become a murderer. Dogs, for example, have killed many humans in the past.
They can also become a leeching slob. Providing no enjoyment to you and taking your resources and money.

However, a human CAN change the world.
A human CAN become a great scientist, a great engineer, a great philosopher.
A human can reach the stars on his own.


Sure they could also become a leeching slob or a murderer, just like the dog could, but the fact of the matter is that a human with a working human brain will always have more potential than a dog with a working dog brain.

Saving the human would be the most logical thing to do. Saving the pet would be an appeal to emotion fallacy.

Now, If I had to choose between saving my friend or saving a stranger?
The playing fields are level. I have more stake in my friend.
Of course I would save my friend.

First, i'd like to thank you for replying in a civilized manner and not hurling insults of 'monstrous' or 'immature'... even though my reply to you was a bit aggressive, sorry

I do see your point. I value humans and even when they're scum of the earth, if they're not about to kill me I would rather them just be in prison and not a danger to society. I don't believe executions solve anything except some slight satisfaction that goes away after awhile.

And honestly same with pets, I've had many pets and over the years a few have died. I loved all my animals dearly and went through serious bouts of depression cause I always felt that it was my fault, but it passes so no losing your pet will not cause this giant hole in your life that will never be filled again.

But in a spur of the moment my instincts would tell me to jump in for my pet. If I could i'd save the stranger but seeing as this scenario makes us choose one or the other i'm just going with what i'd realistically do. Now how I coped with it after the fact is a different story.

Anyways, I like your take on things. You're nice

edit: When I read my post to myself it sounds strange. Next shift starts soon so no time to edit, hope you got my meaning :3

 

[clippen05]

The results of this poll disgust me. I know that people love their pets and that's fine by me but I will never understand how someone can justify sacrificing a human for an animal. Of course people say well that person could be worthless, but then again, how valuable is some animal. At best, an animal is a friend for a decade until they die. A single human can make a difference in thousands of peoples lives. Until every single human in the world is well-fed, protected and somewhat prosperous, I don't understand how you can start saving other species. (Exceptions made to dieing species that are dieing because of human involvement) But to value some worthless mutt that you hugged and played ball with for a few years over a human who could have anywhere from 10 to 80 years left to live, left to make a difference in the world... it disgusts me. Come on, I'm waiting for the flameing. I don't care how precious your dog or cat is. That human is someone's child, or someone's father, or someone's wife. All that dog knows is you and it couldn't care less whose owner it is (as long as they're not abusive) if their fed and cared for.

 

[BarbaricGoose]

The dog isn't equal to a human friend.

How do you figure?

Right now, at this very moment, thousands of children are dying of starvation. It is a slow, agonizing death - very painful. You can literally save hundreds of them RIGHT NOW; all you have to do is sell every luxury item you own. Sell your house, your car, your computer, and everything that is not absolutely critical to your bare survival. Then collect all of that money, as well as every penny of your savings, and donate it to charity. All of those children will live. If you do not do this, they will die.

So now show us a picture of your bare tent which you have moved into on the cheapest piece of land in Kansas, having given up everything you own to save these poor children. If you haven't done so, well then...

HOW can you be so indifferent to a stranger's life? How can you possibly value your own selfish pleasure over the lives of innocent children?

Anyway... I'd save my pet. I'm the one risking my ass, so I'm gonna save the person or animal that I have the connection with. If I saved the person, their family would be grateful, but I'd be heartbroken. Or they can be heartbroken. Either way, hearts will ache. In the end, I'm the one swimming into a FUCKING WHIRLPOOL to drag someone out, so I think I'm gonna treat myself to a nice cup of not letting a loved one die.

If I could save two people or my pet, I'd save the two people. But one life for one life, it's always gonna be the pet. I don't think that makes me a disgusting monster, but to each their own.

Batman: Would save

Ah, the ol' Batman Fallacy. I never tire of it. Batman would never be caught in a whirlpool. Stop throwing out your red herring eating strawmen.

 

[Pandabearparade]

The results of this poll disgust me.

I like the cut of your jib, stranger.

 

[DugMachine]

The results of this poll disgust me. I know that people love their pets and that's fine by me but I will never understand how someone can justify sacrificing a human for an animal. Of course people say well that person could be worthless, but then again, how valuable is some animal. At best, an animal is a friend for a decade until they die. A single human can make a difference in thousands of peoples lives. Until every single human in the world is well-fed, protected and somewhat prosperous, I don't understand how you can start saving other species. (Exceptions made to dieing species that are dieing because of human involvement) But to value some worthless mutt that you hugged and played ball with for a few years over a human who could have anywhere from 10 to 80 years left to live, left to make a difference in the world... it disgusts me. Come on, I waiting for the flame. I don't care how precious your dog or cat is. That human is someone's child, or someone's father, or someone's wife. All that dog knows is you and it couldn't care less whose owner it is (as long as they're not abusive) if their fed and cared for.

Simmer down bruh. We get you value humans over anything else and that's fine but you're 'disgusted', like are you really 'disgusted'? Besides, somebody made a post very similar to this one about a billion times in the thread so just read those and you'll get your fill of flamerade

 

[jordanredd]

First off, you know nothing about me, so you hardly have the right to look down on me.

Secondly, giving up all I've worked for to live in a tent is no long term solution to solving problems of mass starvation. I'm sooner to work with more relief organizations.

Lastly, where are you even getting this argument from? You're going from telling me that a cat's life has the same value as a child, to berating me for not giving up all I own to be able to say that I value life. And you're doing this over your computer. See the hypocrisy there mate?

Where am I going with this? You said you were "bothered" that:

"people are claiming indifference to a stranger's life as opposed to their pet's. An animal that wouldn't realize or care if someone died so it could live."

This bothers you, right? That I would risk my life to save my dog, a beloved member of my family, over that of a complete stranger. You and so many others here are taken aback by this.

To which I say again: thousands upon thousands of innocent children are starving to death at this very moment. You have the means to save at least one, if not several of them, right now. You can swear off every luxury item in your possession. Every penny you earn that is not critically essential to your survival can be sent to these children to spare them such an agonizing fate.

Giving away this money IS both a long-term solution and an immediate one. Some of these children could live for decades with a few thousand American dollars. Further, none of this is exclusive to working with a relief organization. You can do both!

After all, it's just *things*, items solely for your entertainment. Surely you would not argue that these things you own are more important than the lives of innocent children, right?

So, assuming you're not going to do any of this - that you're going to keep your toys, your money, and everything else that makes you happy to save these poor kids - Why don't you explain WHY you're not going to do so? Explain why your personal possessions are more important than children's' lives, and then maybe knowing that a lot of people value their pet's lives over strangers won't bother you so much anymore.

 

[RagTagBand]

People stop associating pets as "Animals" and begin associating them as "Members of your family" relatively quickly.

Thus the question is equivalent to "Would you save a family member or a stranger"?

I'd save my pet who has never, ever been in a position to learn how to swim, whereas people have countless opportunities throughout life to learn how to swim.

 

[Cowabungaa]

My pets, in a way, saved my freakin' life. I love them, I adore them. They're not just animals, they're family.

So yes I'd save them over a stranger.

 

[Filiecs]

First, i'd like to thank you for replying in a civilized manner and not hurling insults of 'monstrous' or 'immature'... even though my reply to you was a bit aggressive, sorry

I do see your point. I value humans and even when they're scum of the earth, if they're not about to kill me I would rather them just be in prison and not a danger to society. I don't believe executions solve anything except some slight satisfaction that goes away after awhile.

And honestly same with pets, I've had many pets and over the years a few have died. I loved all my animals dearly and went through serious bouts of depression cause I always felt that it was my fault, but it passes so no losing your pet will not cause this giant hole in your life that will never be filled again.

But in a spur of the moment my instincts would tell me to jump in for my pet. If I could i'd save the stranger but seeing as this scenario makes us choose one or the other i'm just going with what i'd realistically do. Now how I coped with it after the fact is a different story.

Anyways, I like your take on things. You're nice

You're welcome, and thank you too.

I completely understand your point as well.
When I watched my dad accidentally run over the dog I was raised with thought I would never get over it, but I did.
Now I like cats.

 

[Secret world leader (shhh)]

As a wee lad, I was taught to fear strangers.

As a teenager, I learned to not give a fuck about strangers.

I'm saving my goddamn Cat.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

If there is a option to scream for someone who can swim better than you, can't you scream so that he/she saves the person, and you save your pet?

Also, what kind of pet do you have that can't swim? A stone?

 

[Elric_de_Melnibone]

If there is no extreme incentive to act differently, I would save my pet.

The stranger is not in my monkey-sphere, hence I don't care.
If there's time afterwards, of course I'd save both.

I don't care about what society or anyone thinks, but I value all life equally (with the exception of hatred towards wasps and mosquitos, which is based only on bad experience, and flaws the statement I just made, but I'm not perfect, deal with it), a human is no better than an animal, in my opinion, we ARE animals, just with a brain capacity that makes me worry at times.

And as I value humans no higher than animals, my guts would decide on who to save, and my guts tell me to save those in my monkey-sphere first. And my family, friends and pets have the VIP spots in there.

 

[unstabLized]

Eh.. To me, this is dependent on the mind set of the person in the situation. If you choose morals over love and affection, or vice versa. It also sort of depends on the pet too, like how long have you been with them, what they've done, etc. As much as one choice over the other might disgust you or anyone else, it's how that person thinks. It might be wrong in someone elses eyes, but it's right in theirs. You can call them a dumb ass whos brain is replaced with coconuts, but it won't change anything in their eyes. Plus, this is all happening in the heat of the moment right? You don't really have time to sit back and think "Hmm well that guy might discover the cure for aids, or he can be a murderer.. Then again, my dog might die tomorrow..". You're probably going to end up quickly deciding if its morality over love, or love over morality, and making your mind up and going with that.

With me though, I'm not even that good of a swimmer, so I probably wouldn't even get in the whirlpool in the first place. Would up killing all 3 of us. I would call 911 though.

I do like the question though, made me think, so thank you for that, even though its apparently caused a flame war. I'll just raise my shield and quietly leave through the back door.

Captcha: Angel Wings. That can come in handy in this situation..

 

[Bvenged]

I am shocked after I voted to see more people would save their pets over a human being. A person with infinitely more potential to their lives. You don't know if that person is a murderer or a life-saving brain surgeon - but because you don't know that, it is exactly why you should save them - but exactly how many people are murderers to normal human beings?

Escapists, I are disappoint.

 

[Mikejames]

snip

Your argument doesn't have basis if you're already guilty of everything you're accusing me of.

So I'd appreciate if you'd stop avoiding points of the actual topic trying to turn this into a red herring on whether personal wealth indicates sociopathic tendencies.

 

[DeathsHands]

I think the Escapists are autic

I am shocked after I voted to see more people would save their pets over a human being. A person with infinitely more potential to their lives. You don't know if that person is a murderer or a life-saving brain surgeon - but because you don't know that, it is exactly why you should save them - but exactly how many people are murderers to normal human beings?

Escapists, I are disappoint.

I think the Escapists are autistic, darling.

 

[Risingblade]

I'd save my pet. I love my pet while this stranger is well a stranger. I have no connection towards them aside from being in the same species. Besides it's a whirlpool I have a better chance of saving my pet than a human who weights a lot more. Though if it is someone I can save why the hell can't I add the extra 7 pounds my pet would weight? I'd try to save both of them if I could.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

No I'd still try on the off chance the other person can be guilted into acting against his/her own self interest. I never said anything about it being morally wrong or right.

It just seems a bit weird that youd try your hardest to get someone to disagree with you in that situation "Please dont think the way i think!". What would be even more ironic is if the person who would have saved you was convinced by your post here in the escapist to adopt your world view and thus wouldnt save you. If anything the only logical thing to do is to try your hardest to convince everyone its only right to save the human while secretly saving the dog just so youre sure when it comes down to it that someone will save you.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

I don't care about what society or anyone thinks, but I value all life equally (with the exception of hatred towards wasps and mosquitos, which is based only on bad experience, and flaws the statement I just made, but I'm not perfect, deal with it), a human is no better than an animal, in my opinion, we ARE animals, just with a brain capacity that makes me worry at times.

People say this but i always find it pretty funny to think about the consequences.

For example if you had to choose between a blind flat worm and a human niether of which you know would you pick the human 50% of the time? Would you really need to think about it? What about a mayfly? If you had to choose who had to die, a mayfly or a human would you consider picking the mayfly? I think we all value some animals above other animals and accept life isnt always equal. For example unless youre vegan you obviously value a taste over the life of another creature which you say is equal to you.