Poll: The Value of a Human Life

[zehydra]

Human lives do not have anything like intrinsic value.

 

[lacktheknack]

if Daystar and Vault101 were drowning...which one would you save, the dog or the paedophile?

Fixed it for you.

Ouch.

I kid of course, Daystar is only a Alledged paedophile.

OUCH.

OT: I'd save the person regardless. People can turn a new leaf.

 

[TheScientificIssole]

if Daystar and Vault101 were drowning...and there was a WEREWOLF PAEDOPHILE in the way!

Fixed it for you.

I kid of course, Daystar is only a Alledged WEREWOLF PAEDOPHILE!

OT: I would save the human. Unless the person is a convicted GHOST! or other particularly terrible DRACULA!

Double fixed. Halloween themed posts! GHOULS! BOO!
OT:Is the dog A SPIRIT OF VENGEANCE! or A FRANKENSTEIN? Do the human and dog switch MURDEROUS SOULS?
Wait, it doesn't matter, because its nearing Halloween, and the Halloween spirit makes my a SCROTUM of a HUMAN BEING!
Pointless murder it is then!

 

[Rogue Trooper]

I would most likely save the person

 

[Sandjube]

I'd jump down and hang with them too. I've been looking for some more friends.

 

[neoontime]

So this thread basically sums up the "I lost faith in humanity idea".
Human of course.

 

[rednose1]

Human life is a pretty wonderful thing. I'd always go with saving a person over an animal.

 

[NotALiberal]

You're not ending a life. No matter what you do, it's a net positive. The result of doing nothing is both die.

Whichever positive you value more is up to you. I personally value my pet over most random people. I value my family over most random people too. We had this thread a while ago, and no satisfying logical argument could be given to justify anthopocentricism (Which is probably because it's a load of bunk). If you value the life of a stranger over your dog, that's fine too. It's a position I'd have trouble coming to or agreeing with, but that's fine. It's a stated value, and those vary from person to person.

Do what you want. A random person could be good or bad, and my judgement isn't based on that. No matter how good or bad they may be, a stranger is worth less to me than my dog.

Let's just leave this quote here.

"Why, then, should not groups of superior men be able to justify their enslavement, exploitation, or even genocide of inferior human groups on factual and moral grounds akin to those we now rely on to justify our treatment of the animals we harness as beasts of burden, that we butcher for food and clothing, or that we destroy as disease-bearing pests or as dangerous predators?"

I love how the Escapist of all places (home of overly zealous Liberals ready to cry "RACISM/SEXISM/HOMOPHOBIA" at the slightest chance they get), values animal life over human life. /sarcasm/ Why should I treat Gays/Blacks/Womens "equally"? Oh.. is it because they're PEOPLE just like you and me....? I'm honestly confused here. The first can be overbearingly flamboyant, the second are smelly dirty niggers, and the third just WHINE all day about EVERYTHING. They are of no value to me. /sarcasm

This is the type of idiocy and selfishness that makes the world the shithole it is today.

 

[Alandoril]

Are people really claiming they would save an animal they loved over a HUMAN BEING that they didn't know?

REALLY?

 

[T4nkcommander]

A human life your be more valuable to you than any other kind of life.

Why?

Self-interest. Basically, you should act the way you would want others to act towards you. That includes preferring human life to other forms, basically because you ARE human, not anything else (I guess).

Then again, of course, I reserve the right to not pull up the human if I felt that I/the world would be better off without them, in which case I might as well use the time to save the basically blameless animal.

It bewilders me that most people miss this. Judging by the responses, a third of the people here would let any other member die to save an animal. Seeing as they are so flippant with human lives it makes me consider not bothering to save them.

 

[ODWX9K]

It is going to depend on a number of variables that I must know.

Firstly, is it the "end of the world" scenario and I need to save someone to repopulate the human species? Then sure, I'll pick the individual over my pet.

Secondly, are they someone I would perceive as an asshole? Surely, I'll pick my own dog. Hands-down, no-contest.

There are other variables, too. But generally speaking, I cannot choose a stranger over my own pet, and I'd expect no difference from anyone else.

 

[NLS]

The dog would do a final salute with its paw and do a stone cold facial expression that would pretty much say "My time has come, human being, let me transcend into eternity, and spare the life of this innocent soul."
I would then have to save the human of course, as it was the last dying wish of Mr. Dog.

 

[the_dude_abides]

The human everytime.

I wouldn't be able to live the guilt that I let someones father/mother/son/daughter die so I could save my pet. I would obviously grieve for my pet dog (who is awesome) but it would be nothing compared to the grief and burden a persons loved ones would feel knowing he/she could have been saved but wasn't.

 

[Xan Krieger]

Are people really claiming they would save an animal they loved over a HUMAN BEING that they didn't know?

REALLY?

What makes the person so valuable? In the end it's one life vs one life so given the choice of one life you like vs one you know nothing about you pick the one you like.

 

[Icehearted]

I posed a similar scenario to people I knew using MT Rushmore vs a person. Society would decide who would be savable. The person could be a child, could be a grown man, didn't matter, the point was one person or a national monument. They felt uneasy every time because they saw my point right away, and there was often guilt because they'd thought the same thing for the same reasons others had.

Human life ultimately is a triviality. When compared to animals, generally we default to our species, but what if the animal was the last of it's kind? What if you were on a sinking ship with the last of say, pandas in a cage, or a human being, and there was only time enough to get one onto your escape craft before the other would drown? What then?

I think in your case not acting doesn't equate murder, that's an odd line of thinking to me.