Support NeoGAF

[Pandaman]

How many dead kids would it take before you decided to choose your pet instead?

i dunno.

7 i guess, i guess its technically not my cat so you might have to pop off a few extra for the owners quota.

 

[Ikael]

- Because it is a pose that makes you look cynic ("humans are so horrible") yet sensible at the same time ("I like animals, isn't that cute?")

- Because they humanize animals, mainly their pets, without knowing that it is chemically and physically impossible that they feel the same human emotions in the same way as we do.

- And basically, because in the end it all amounts to a complete lack of knowdegle of the basics of biology or anything about the animal kingdom other than a couple of discovery channel facts. Animals do start wars, steal, rape, maim, destroy ecosystems, mutilate and kill, and some of that they do it at a faster rate than humans, only harnessed by their lack of technological advance

 

[BorkBork]

We've evolved beyond the natural order of things. We've gone beyond survival and onto domination and expansion.

The mentality of domination of nature and expansion worked well in an era of abundance and low population; it's served us poorly in an era of ecological scarcity. We are still completely dependent on the the life of this world for our essentials of clean air, water, and food.

The Earth's surface is now ours. We are gods.

Gods who are still at the whims and mercy of our environment.

8 billion little pieces that make up a god strong enough to destroy the surface of our planet, strong enough to eliminate a species or society in no time flat. Strong enough to flatten mountains or build new ones out of our own waste. Make smog or acid rain? No problem. We're strong enough to rebuild, protect, destroy... do anything we desire. We as a species are immortal like a god too. You can cut off our arm with a typhoon but it will grow back. You can wipe us all out but a few, and in 300 years time, we'll be back to normal size.

I have trouble primarily with your god statement. While we have becoming a force capable of shaping things on a global scale, we're still at the whim and mercy of our environment, and we are far too short sighted in our thinking to be considered "gods." To attempt to control things with our current understanding and belief that we can grow and utilize technology without limits and consequences reeks of hubris. Your examples of acid rain and smog are actually unintended negative consequence of what we think of as progress, hardly befitting of the actions of gods. (well, perhaps hedonistic foolish gods?) And there are countless things that we are completely powerless to rebuild and protect, and that inability comes not from finding new ways of doing things, but how we perceive and relate to our surroundings.

Therefore, as the gods that we act like, it is our responsibility to take care of this surface as a loving god would. Of course, we're shitting it up to high heaven, but still, it is our responsibility. It was the minute we stopped acting like 'animals' and started acting like something 'greater.'

Other than the wording that we are gods and the subjectivity of the statement of "something greater", I agree with this. I believe that self-awareness is a gift and a curse; insofar as we have power over the world and over one another, we must learn to do what the leaf and the whale do of their own nature. We must learn to keep the balance. Having intelligence, we must not act in ignorance. Having choice, we must not act without responsibility.

 

[WickedAngel]

What about choosing between your beloved pet and a deranged but potentially rehabilitatable inmate?

Dog wins every day of the week.

 

[Replicant]

I don't know. But some animals like dogs, usually have undying loyalty to its owner. How many humans are capable of that? Humans' loyalty is conditional. The minute we feel abandoned or 'betrayed', we are willing to abandon or hurt the other person as well. Dogs may feel sad, for example, if its owner abandon it but it's likely that it will stay loyal to said owner unless the owner abuses it badly.

 

[mentalfloss]

I hope this thread isn't going the way of objectively putting humans over animals because of some higher level of consciousness.

Richard Dawkins and Peter Singer have a really interesting conversation about this issue, specifically, what our moral responsibilities towards non-human animals are and how that relates to Darwinism:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYYNY2oKVWU&playnext_from=TL&videos=vVPmTdxSXXY

Don't have sound here, but I will check this out later. Don't want to diverge the thread, but Singer's stuff is pretty good - check out 'Practical Ethics'.

 

[Sol..]

What about choosing between your beloved pet and a deranged but potentially rehabilitatable inmate?

What if your beloved pet was a deranged but potentially rehabilitatable inmate?

It's practically the same thing. all you guys talk about unconditional love and loyalty. If you work carefully at enslaving a dude you might get that as well, look at nick cannon.

 

[Dark Octave]

I don't know. But some animals like dogs, usually have undying loyalty to its owner. How many humans are capable of that? Humans' loyalty is conditional. The minute we feel abandoned or 'betrayed', we are willing to abandon or hurt the other person as well. Dogs may feel sad, for example, if its owner abandon it but it's likely that it will stay loyal to said owner unless the owner abuses it badly.

That's just predictable stupidity. I can't see honor or value in that. A dog is hardwired to be loyal almost without fail. Humans can think for themselves and go either way. Some people are loyal to the end, some aren't. It's our powerful noodles that give us free will beyond what any animal is capable of and that is what makes us so much more valuable in the game of life.

 

[CrankyJay]

Have yet to meet an animal that was an asshole.

 

[JumpJeff84]

Have yet to meet an animal that was an asshole.

Not a cat owner I take it?

 

[Dark Octave]

Have yet to meet an animal that was an asshole.

Are you serious?

Boy do I have some stories to tell you...

 

[CrankyJay]

Not a cat owner I take it?

:lol

No sorry I have a lab!

 

[Ollie Pooch]

Have yet to meet an animal that was an asshole.

My cat's a total bitch. But i still love her :lol

 

[DonMigs85]

I met an asshole llama and alpaca once, they spit on me

 

[krypt0nian]

Like I've said before on GAF, I'd go into a burning building to save my dogs long before I'd save some random person. Just like I'd save my family long before someone else.

In that case, to me my dog's lives greatly outweigh a human's. Dogs have far less ability to take care of themselves, and these two pups have been entrusted to me with their lives.

If my family and my dogs were in the building I'd save as many as I could starting with whomever was closest to the door.

 

[RustyNails]

What about choosing between your beloved pet and a deranged but potentially rehabilitatable inmate?

Read my post couple of posts above:

Yeah we all like our pets. That's not even the question. Personally, I love kitties and I'm a card carrying member of CatGAF. But I still value human life over animal life, unless we are talking about extremes where you decide between a kitty and a genocidal mass murdering rapist clown.

If my family and my dogs were in the building I'd save as many as I could starting with whomever was closest to the door.

But what if your dog and a human/family member was at the same spot in the burning building, and you somehow could save only one of them?

 

[krypt0nian]

Depends on which family member and which dog.

 

[Mgoblue201]

That's just predictable stupidity. I can't see honor or value in that. A dog is hardwired to be loyal almost without fail. Humans can think for themselves and go either way. Some people are loyal to the end, some aren't. It's our powerful noodles that give us free will beyond what any animal is capable of and that is what makes us so much more valuable in the game of life.

And people are "hardwired" to be social and emotionally dependent too. When someone is a lone wolf, it is usually a personality trait or something developed through experience, no more chosen than the color of one's eyes. Humans have a greater ability to act on those impulses, that is true, but so do dogs to a certain degree.