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

[jordanredd]

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.

I does have basis because I'm not passing judgement on those that would save a stranger's life over their pet's life. But there are a hell of a lot of people who think I and others are disgusting monsters for saying we would do the opposite. You're not one of the worst, but the judgement is there.

Bottom line, to anyone who would "accuse" someone of placing more value on their pet's life: take a look around. Unless you're living like a monk, having donated every last bit of your cash and belongings to save every innocent starving child's life you possibly can, then all of your arguments about a human's life having "intrinsic" value are horseshit.

Someone who won't even give up their damn iPhone to save a stranger's life isn't going to lecture me because I won't let my dog die to do the same. And with that, I'm done here.

 

[DeathsHands]

And with that, I'm done here.

I won't believe that unless you don't respond to this quote.

Checkmate.

 

[Mikejames]

*snip*

You don't understand the difference between not contributing to a charity, and actively allowing someone to die for the sake of a house pet?

I'm just asking people to understand the extent of a relationship with an animal. You would knowingly ignore a person's pleas for help, be willing to let a child lose their mother or for a parent to lose their child, just so that a cat can run around your legs for a few more years?

 

[OniaPL]

Of course I'd save my pet, my dog is far more valuable to me than this random stranger, and it's not like I care about a random person or his/her family.

 

[OniaPL]

Its a person... there isn't a choice here.

That was my thought was well. I was clearly wrong. I just hope people would grow up a bit if they ever actually run into this situation.

I fail to understand you here. If you care about one thing and don't care about the other, why wouldn't you save the thing you care about? Why would the fact that the thing you dont care about is a human change the outcome? You are a shit person in my eyes if you'd abandon your pet, a member of your pack, for some random stranger. Betraying the one who loves you and trusts you for someone you don't even know would be the morally wrong thing to do.

Fuck the woman, wouldn't even think twice about it.

 

[Jonatron]

I really don't like my dog, so it's a no brainer. And he's a Cocker Spaniel, so he has webbed feet. If he can't be bothered to doggy paddle with natural flippers then damn him to Davy Jones locker.

 

[Pandabearparade]

I fail to understand you here. If you care about one thing and don't care about the other, why wouldn't you save the thing you care about?

One is a human. The other is a dog. If you don't understand this distinction there is nothing I can say to make it clearer.

A human is more important than a dog.

 

[Mikejames]

*snip*

So where are you getting off saying that my using a computer is forsaking hundreds of children?

You don't know how I spend what money I have to help/hurt others.
We're Both using computers. So stop acting like that simple fact is giving you basis to accuse me of some moral inferiority.

A human might be more important than a dog, but not more important than my dog.

By that logic it's not about the dog. It's about you.

 

[deathninja]

I think the Escapists are autistic, darling.

Don't agree with me = special needs

Stay classy, DeathsHands.

 

[SEXTON HALE]

AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!
Damn! I love my dog but if its either him or a human being he is kind of screwed.
I cant see myself letting someone die in place of my pet.
Though I would be frozen with indecision for a while and things might get a bit hazy.
Its seems im not as terrible a person as I thought? Strange...

 

[Elric_de_Melnibone]

One is a human. The other is a dog. If you don't understand this distinction there is nothing I can say to make it clearer.

A human is more important than a dog.

That's the thing, you see it as a dog. It's not a dog, it's my dog, a member of my family who spends its day making me happier and has no problem with putting itself between me and a threat. I don't really understand how someone could just see the thing that depends upon you and would do anything for you, and then tell it to go fuck itself while you save someone you don't even know.

A human might be more important than a dog, but not more important than my dog.

I doubt I have to add anything to this, as it represents my opinion perfectly.
On to the next:

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.

To remind you:

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)

I even already mentioned that of COURSE those decisions are not objective and often contradicting.
I'm a complicated, chaotic and living human being, and by my general princible, every life has value, but my personal experience, emotions and bonds of course clouds and changes that statement and judgement. I will save a loved pet over an unknown human, but I'd rather save an unknown human than a moth. Then again, I'd save a moth over a human I really, really hate. It's my brain, my head, my heart, and it's far from perfect, but it's me.

I think we all value some animals above other animals and accept life isnt always equal.

That's exactly it, you gave the answer yourself, I value some animals above other animals.
Since humans are merely animals like every other race out there, I value some other animals above them. I do not make the distinction between animal and human, which seems so mandatory for so many of you.

And that doesn't have -anything- to do with autism. I don't see humans as objects, nor animals.

 

[Blunderboy]

The stranger. Animals are food, not people.

 

[Quiet Stranger]

Like someone brought up, if it was a small child then yeah but if it was someone my age then I would save my cat.

 

[Pandabearparade]

The stranger. Animals are food, not people.

Animals are people too. Delicious, delicious people.

 

[Ieyke]

I place not a whole lot of value on people I don't know. This is a huge factor in why I kind of genuinely would like a zombie apocalypse.
I'm too cold and science-minded to the world and people outside of my personal sphere. One less person who I don't know... *shrug* Our planet has too many people anyways.

So, save a person I don't know, don't care about, and had no reason to trust me, or save a pet I love and know very well that trusts the hell out of me and relies on me to keep it safe and happy....

Yea, I'm going to save my pet.


Contrary to what that might imply about me, I'm actually a very....heroically inclined individual, and if it was just the woman drowning I try like hell to save her.
...but I have priorities.

If Jesus(assuming he was a real and magical awesome here to save our souls god minion) himself were drowning and one of my friends was drowning, I'd save my friend.


I'll always try to save SOMEONE, but friend>stranger every time, regardless of species or importance to the rest of mankind.


Make what you will of that.




Even IF I cared about my reputation(and I really don't), saving my pet wouldn't be enough to seriously damage it. I have good karma backlogged from here to the moon.

 

[Hemlet]

I'd save the stranger based on the grounds that my pet is a turtle. If my turtle is drowning, then there's probably a more complicated reason behind the drowning and my turtle is probably fucked whether I save it or not. At least if I save the person I can keep my "decent person" cred.

 

[GundamSentinel]

Why would a human life be worth more than an animal's life? The pet means more to me than the stranger, I'll save my pet, thanks.

 

[Mikejames]

I never really accused you of having inferior morals, I just pointed out the fact that choosing to save the dog instead of the stranger is similar to choosing all of those fun luxury goods you have over starving children. I'm not giving money to the poor or the destitute so I can't claim superiority on that ground.

But the comparison boils down to stating that a person not giving everything to charity is as morally reprehensible as someone leaving a stranger to die on the road.

So those people who would choose they're mother over a stranger aren't doing it for their mother, they're doing it for themselves?

No. You claimed that a human is more important than a dog unless it's your dog. So the difference being your own emotional attachment. A difference that tells you to prioritize that attachment to a dog over a mother's attachment to their child.

 

[bojackx]

I'd save my pet. I don't understand why people think that humans are more entitled to life than other species.

Does intelligence govern importance? If so, some mentally impaired people have a lower IQ than members of other species, but they're still considered more important. Is it just because humans should look out for their own species? Because that's hardly a strong argument either.

So yes, I'd save my pet, the organism that's been with me for years and not save some random lady I just met just because they're the same species as me.

 

[Amaury_games]

I can swim and I'd save my pet, if that wouldn't put me in danger (if I was sure I could actually save it, that is). After it was safe, I'd try to get the person (same rules as the pet, i.e. I wouldn't die trying to do it). If there was someone else close to me that could swim, I'd ask that person for help, but if I'm really alone, then there isn't even the point of calling someone for help, since there isn't anyone near me. So I'd choose, and I'd choose saving my pet. I know it, I love it (to the point that I don't like calling her "it"), and I don't have to explain myself to the family of the stranger, since I wasn't the one who put him/her in peril. If they weren't around when he/she needed them, that's not my fault. I saved the one that matters to me.

One another note, if I felt I could, I'd try to get them both to land before saving either (i.e., I'd swim to my pet, grab hold of him, then swim towards the person, hold both, and then swim to the shore). I think I could do this, but since the point of the tread is the choice, then the former paragraph remains my final answer.