Poll: Who would you rather let die, your pet or me?

[TehCookie]

Let's see, the cat I know and love, who greets me everyday when I come home from work/school and sleeps next to me every night and is always there when I need him vs some person I don't know and has a 90% chance or higher of being as asshole. I vote my cat. Even if I look at the negative side of things, putting up with a cat is a lot easier than putting up with a human.

 

[everlost516]

People should always come before animals.

Yes, IMO this applies to all people and all animals.

 

[Comrade_Beric]

it's deciding that another person's personal attachment to their furry life-addition trumps your human rights.

You have no right that demands I save you. Your right to life is to prevent me killing you, but does not require that I endanger myself. To do so would imply your life if more valuable than mine.

What the hell? I never said that XP! How is my name on that quote post?

He's responding to something I said, but he got it from a reply you made and mis-cut the quote code. Mistakes happen sometimes. *shrug*

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

Sorry, but I felt guilty knowing that our 19 year old cat with gum disease got put to sleep, even if it was basically for her own good. I just couldn't knowingly condemn the cats we have no.
Nothing personal.

Oh, and I don't see how this means a "serious lack of empathy". There's loads of empathy, it just happens to be toward our pets (who we know and love) rather than a random stranger (who we've never met and know nothing about)

 

[Way]

Re: the above. Sorry, my bad.

Again, seriously you would be torn between an animal and me, a stranger? We're talking right now. We can exchange ideas, you can see that I'm a thinking being and so are you. We might like the same things, we could even be friends in the right circumstances. To me, even if you hate me that makes it no contest.

But you demonstrate no great value (it's not an insult, read on!). To me personally, or to humanity as a whole. Your ideas aren't powerful enough and your skills are unlikely to be sufficient to make any significant difference. Your loss would be an emotional one for your family, but nothing really noticable is lost to humanity. And in that way we're entirely identical, you and me. You can't simply beat the pet's value. You have to be valuable in your own right.

Actually, there's a signifcant problem with linking your value to general utility at all (as you have done above). You're right that we are more versatile than animals. But then you leave the door open for objects to rank above people. Very sophisticated computers could no doubt produce a diverse and exstensive output. Coma patients can't. Would you therefore save the machine and leave the vegetable? Otherwise, you're stuck with inherent value of human life, which is frankly silly, since it's attaches virtues to chemical compounds.

A better argument is that the social group we form needs us to protect each other to function. But again, if that's the only reason to save you, I can safely assume my actions will not destabilise it enough to endanger anyone but you. You are, as has been pointed out, screwed by reliance on irrational humans. We all put the maximum value on what we want.

 

[OldAccount]

Depends...

...Are you willing to sit in my lap and purr?

 

[Griphphin]

As I said, this depends on values. People has killed for money because they value money more. People have waged war for money/resources/religion because they value them more. Reason and logic do play a part in how we value things but some values are just hard to change. I simply value a cat or a dog of mine more than a complete stranger. A companion that sits around and "simply" not being a douche or a stranger that could potentially have potential for something? I'll go with whatever non-douche I can get my hands on.

And what's with this grand scheme of things? Have I missed that we're all part of something bigger? Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

In the grand scheme of things, someone with a college education is more likely to help a lot more people than a dog whose primary function is nothing other than existing around 2-4 people.

No, it's not applicable. That's like telling people to leave Hitler alone because he had family and friends. He was probably admired and liked by more people than OP. That doesn't stop people from saying that they'd kill Hitler in "If you could travel back in time"- or "If you could kill one person"-threads.

Do people get new pets when their current ones die? Some do, some don't. Do people move on and begin dating again when a lover dies? Some do, some don't.

Also, "nobody can replace what the OP could have done"? As he is a stranger to me, he can be replaced with anyone else. Any accomplishment he might have made would probably be made by someone else, although maybe later.

The point of the "he has friends as well" section is that your dog is a companion whose death will effect you and your family, maybe a friend, whereas your death (flipping the situation to make you a stranger here) would effect your family in a much more tragic manner, along with all of your friends and a good number of your acquaintances.

To throw another possibility in there, I don't know a lot about OP's situation here, but he may be providing for another person or more with his income, something else that humans are capable of doing which paets are not.


The vast majority of people aren't Hitler, nor will they ever come even close to being as bad as Hitler. We're talking about a normal person whose death would most likely effect those around him more than the death of a pet, and who can do much greater things than a dog can for the world. Sure, he might be the next Hitler, but a college student is much more likely to get a job doing something for the good of those around him than he is getting a job overseeing the killing of millions of people.

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

My pet. I see more value in a human being than an animal. Especially when I can walk down to the store and get a new one.

 

[ThatDaveDude1]

If you want equal respect for all, then we'll have to start killing and eating people too.

Or stop eating animals...

That wouldn't stop other animals from killing other animals.

I never said that it would.

I love how you cut out the most important part of my post .

Edit: Sorry for the double post

You edited your post after I quoted it.

I can't control if an animal chooses to respect another animal, I can only choose if I do. Ideally, yes, all living creatures would respect all other living creatures, nothing would ever die, and everyone would be eternally happy. Life doesn't work like that though.

Sorry about that. Your post came so far after I made that edit that I assumed you cut down the post like your previous quote of mine.

You're right, life doesn't work like that. Which is why we don't respect all animals equally, and most certainly not to the degree of humans. Plus, think about this: do you like it when other people disrespect you? Nope. Animals don't respect us, so why should we respect them? That actually has an answer, it's because unlike those lesser animals, we have an identifiable conscious, which is the main reason we can discuss this question in the first place. I definitely don't think animals should be mistreated. I do however see the reasoning behind their use as a food source.

Would you eat a kid with a mental disability? What if someone was born with only half of a brain. I doubt that he'd be able to show you the level of respect that you could show him, nor would he be able to discuss this topic. I also doubt he'd have very much of an identifiable conscious. Would you consider him on par with a "lesser animal?"

 

[Way]

The above is another reason not to link value purely to utility.

But with that out of the way, what other reason can there be for humans to be "better" than animals? Because you've removed the key thing that makes us different to them.

 

[Sporky111]

I'd rather my pet die. Don't get me wrong, I love animals. But I'm not so attached to them as to let another human die. Just today I took my cat into the vet with an infected ear, and it crossed my mind "Should I pay to have this fixed, or will it just be better to put him down?" And this is a cat I've had for more then 4 years. I understand that when it's an animal's time to die, it's the time. I wouldn't cry over the death of any of my pets, just because I'd rather have them die than have them live in suffering or have them become a liability upon us.

 

[Shock and Awe]

A human is always worth more than an animal, unless that human is a real POS and the animal is fucking awesome, but since you are a stranger I do not know that so your life is worth more by default.

 

[Comrade_Beric]

Snip

I noticed you stopped replying to my posts...

The difference between choosing an animal over a human being and choosing a family member of a stranger is that in the second decision, you're choosing a human either way. The only deciding factor you have to go on is your personal attachment. It's is trumping nothing, it's simply a tie breaker. Choosing to save one's pet over another human being isn't just siding with personal attachment, it's deciding that your personal attachment is more important than another human's rights, or to put that differently, it's deciding that another person's personal attachment to their furry life-addition trumps your human rights.

Do animals not have rights? Or are they just not as important as humans? I was under the impression that all sentient beings deserved equal amounts of respect.

There's a reason we don't issue citizenship and voting rights to dogs, cats, horses, and rabbits. We like them and they do deserve respect, and should not be killed unnecessarily, but we're talking sacrificing a human to satisfy someone's personal attachment to their pet.

 

[Emilox The Great]

i would have to say my cat. i am sorry dude, but i dont really like humans that much. 60% of every member of the human race is a lying twofaced douche. no offense... + i like my cat a lot xD

 

[BeepBoopBrother]

It honestly depends on how sexy you are.
You need to be a 9 for me to at least consider saving you.

 

[DesiPrinceX09]

One can always get another pet no problem, but a person cannot be replaced. I would be sad if my cats died (if i still had them that is) but my loss would be nothing compared to the loss your family would suffer if you died.

 

[BeepBoopBrother]

i would have to say my cat. i am sorry dude, but i dont really like humans that much. 60% of every member of the human race is a lying twofaced douche. no offense... + i like my cat a lot xD

60%? You're too optimistic, dude.

 

[TornadoFive]

Wow. I expected this poll to be seriously lopsided in favour of saving the OP. Seriously guys? You'd put the life of an animal before a human?

I mean, yeah, people have a bond with their pets, but still. I would never, NEVER, put an animal's life before a human's.

 

[Darkauthor81]

You.

Really I have nothing against you, but I fucking love my cats. They're very important to me. Sorry my man, you're out.

This ^^^

Wow. I expected this poll to be seriously lopsided in favour of saving the OP. Seriously guys? You'd put the life of an animal before a human?

I mean, yeah, people have a bond with their pets, but still. I would never, NEVER, put an animal's life before a human's.

My dog would risk his life to protect me and I'd do the same for him. As for the OP... I don't know this guy. Frankly I don't give a damn about him. Dog wins hands down.

 

[Blue Musician]

This is a serious question. I want to know whether you would rather save the life of your pet animal or me in an emergency.

I am a complete stranger and you know nothing about me, therefore I could be a disliked loner or beloved by family or friends, a dumbass or a prodigy, a criminal or a volunteer with children and the elderly. You can't know.


EDIT:

These poll results are hardly surprising; a similar question was posed by another user on a forum I frequent and most people were more than happy to let that OP die, even kill and torture him, over their dog or cat. There is a serious lack of empathy in the modern world.

Even as a pet owner myself (I have a cat), I feel that people who put the lives of animals they own over other human beings are SELFISH. Selfish because their pets love them unconditionally and provide companionship, and they don't want to give this source of happiness up, while many people don't get along well with other humans. However, I personally could never live with the guilt knowing that I let another human being with family, friends, a significant other, a job where they provide value to others, hopes, and dreams die for an animal that is barely self-aware and mainly exists to make me happy and entertain me.

It would pain me to do so, but I would kill my cat myself so that any one of you may live.

EDIT 2:

Yes, the poll question was poorly worded when compared to the content of the OP, sorry.

Actually I'll have to sacrifice my pets soon since we are leaving to Australia in 2 weeks and never coming back. So you would technically be saved.
But if this wasn't applicable I would sacrifice you both. Sorry, I'm a misanthrope and I have an extreme lack of empathy.
But if this wasn't applicable either, I would save you.