Support NeoGAF

[Pavaloo]

"A dog is just a dog." SMFH.

It really depends on all circumstances at hand, but I mean come on, my dog is part of my family. He's not just some mutt and he never will be.

In all of these hypotheticals there's the hypothetical question of "what if that person is a mother/daughter/son/father/brother/sister? They mean more to people than just a dog." Well, what if they don't? Hypothetically. Let's say they're a loner and no one will miss them. I mean that's how you're looking at the dog right? YEESH.

 

[CornBurrito]

No, dogs don't have sapience.

This is debated at present I believe.

They fail the traditional mirror test, but IIRC they pass an alternative mirror test that uses urine and smell. I'll see if I can find the paper. It is very possible I'm wrong about the results.

Both. This isn't an either or thing.

Human life is valuable because it is human life....

that is circular reasoning.

For starters, its a label I'd never pass on to an animal.

Can you not play games and give me an actual definition? I don't even care if you just post the dictionary definition.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

That wouldn't be my issue. It would be yours. My dog's life would be my issue. Not yours.


See how that works?

Holly fucking shit dude.

 

[Alligatorjandro]

What is this even about?Saving a dog or a person from a burning car?

 

[ChubbyHuggs]

So do you guys plan on visiting the graves of your pets?

Cremated like the rest of my family.

 

[cutmeamango]

The issue I have is people not so much saying that they'd protect their family member over another person that they don't know. Its the fact that they say their dog, the family member, over someone they don't know.

But where do you cross the line to what is a family member?
Blood relation? Parental hierarchy? Kinship and sympathy? Own subjective classification?
Or your rule is that it has to be of the same species?

Then all you have to do is understand that your idea of family may not be the same to others.

This is debated at present I believe.

They fail the traditional mirror test, but IIRC they pass an alternative mirror test that uses urine and smell. I'll see if I can find the paper. It is very possible I'm wrong about the results.

You are correct.

 

[Joni]

If you chose a random stranger over a pet, would you chose two random strangers over a cousin/an uncle? You're saving two people instead of one. Can you live with telling two people's families you chose your own family member instead of two people? What if it is three-four-five people? At what moment does your love for your family member stop outweighing the logical choice?

It is not like we're saying we value a random dog more than a random person. We're valuing someone special to us more than a random stranger. And that makes such hypothetical choices very difficult.

 

[perfectnight]

Holly fucking shit dude.

That guy has been shitposting nonstop this entire thread.

"I don't care what you think so I'm going to keep posting about how much I don't care"

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

This is debated at present I believe.

They fail the traditional mirror test, but IIRC they pass an alternative mirror test that uses urine and smell. I'll see if I can find the paper. It is very possible I'm wrong about the results.

I was using the broader definition of sapience, in that they have no larger conception of reality or anything higher than themselves and their own lives. THAT'S why I value human life over dogs and would save most humans over most dogs, rather than cynical ideas of who is or is not selfish for valuing their relationships.

Edit: And it does not denigrate other family members to name a dog as a family member; it raises up the dog without affecting the status of the rest of the family. In reality, no matter what people in this thread say, most people will save human life over animal life because such is hardwired into us, biologically. But, in terms of subjective value, there's another story altogether.

 

[scar tissue]

People who say that humans don't have more value than other animals are also objectively wrong. In reality, nature is dictated by the principle of the survival of the fittest, and there is intrinsic value in being the fittest despite whether or not it fits in your simplistic worldview. Humans aren't just the top of the food chain, they are the only species, perhaps in the entire universe, capable of progressing socially and technologically and they deserve their position on the pedestal.

How about no

Most humans are not "the fittest" in any way: dump them in the wild, they die. Leave them in the comfort of civilization, and instead of advancing humanity they will watch TV and grow fat.
How is that fit in any way?
Some exceptional humans (10-20% of humanity at best) deserve their position on the pedestal, the species as a whole not.

 

[krypt0nian]

Holly fucking shit dude.

I know. It's really that simple.

No one would take issue if I said my sister.

Well it's the same thing to me. Again, you don't determine who I call family and protect as such.

Quite simple.

 

[Angry Fork]

For starters, its a label I'd never pass on to an animal.

Humans are animals. So you have to give a different definition/label than that.

 

[perfectnight]

This is debated at present I believe.

They fail the traditional mirror test, but IIRC they pass an alternative mirror test that uses urine and smell. I'll see if I can find the paper. It is very possible I'm wrong about the results.




Human life is valuable because it is human life....

that is circular reasoning.




Can you not play games and give me an actual definition? I don't even care if you just post the dictionary definition.

So you seriously can't imagine why human life is inheritly valuable to humans as a species, individuals and to society? You are right in that some apes are smarter than humans. You are living proof.

 

[Wolfe]

This thread cracks me up, I love the whole "placing a lowly animal above a glorious human?!" bit. Life is life, sure humans have developed to the point of language and all kinds of other cool shit but when it comes down to it we're both living creatures.

Also why are people getting so heated over some of the responses in here? Of course some people are going to want to save their animals, we form attachments and bonds to them on an emotional level while a stranger is just that, an unfamiliar being. That's not to say we shouldn't help strangers but to some people their pets are at an equal value level to human beings that they have no attachment to.

Personally I see the value in a single human life and would do my best to prevent it from death in a hypothetical situation but real life isn't so clear cut and it's hard to say what anyone would or wouldn't do in the heat of the moment with reflexes and instinct taking over. Plus all these "what if" scenarios are really dumb in the sense that they're all super extreme and assume people have superhuman reaction times.

I hope no one has any hard feelings if aliens come by and blow up our world cause their ship was about to crash into it and they had no way to alter course, to them we're lowly animals after all.

 

[Big-E]

What is this even about?Saving a dog or a person from a burning car?

Started as a Vick vs Brown thing then moved on to who would you save, your dog or a random stranger. Some people choose dog and get attacked for it and get called selfish and lacking empathy. Then the debate focuses on species values and how one side thinks that all humans have more worth than any animal while another side tries to explain flaws in that absolute reasoning. Now it is being about judging what the word family means and where that extends.

 

[poppabk]

I think people are arguing over two different ideas. There is 'random stranger' as an idea, ie I can read about thousands being massacred in a foreign country and feel nothing more than a slight pang. This is different to 'random stranger' who for arguments sake just broke their leg in my street and need help.
It's all relative, descriptions of acts of cruelty to animals tug at my heart strings more than descriptions of acts of cruelty to humans and in the absence of any real impact to what I feel, I don't bother analyzing it. Up close and personal those feelings flip.

 

[scar tissue]

So you seriously can't imagine why human life is inheritly valuable to humans as a species, individuals and to society? You are right in that some apes are smarter than humans. You are living proof.

hahahaohwow.jpg
So we finally arrived at the ad hominems, huh?

Human life is inherently valuable to humans because there used to be so few of us that everyone was precious. It's not that I don't have the rooted belief that humans are valuable somewhere deep in me, I do. I can just see beyond that on a rational basis.

 

[krypt0nian]

That guy has been shitposting nonstop this entire thread.

"I don't care what you think so I'm going to keep posting about how much I don't care"

Failure to read.

I was telling him that he didn't get to determine my family. Never said I don't care. I responded to attacks and judgements.

But paint me how you like. People who comprehend the written word know the truth.

It's all you really have left to attack with.

 

[MThanded]

So you seriously can't imagine why human life is inheritly valuable to humans as a species, individuals and to society? You are right in that some apes are smarter than humans. You are living proof.

ruh roh

 

[DY_nasty]

Humans are animals. So you have to give a different definition/label than that.

I don't agree. Humans are above animals.

 

[Sealda]

Sounds a lot like a certain Adolf and a bunch of other cold blooded killers with the same attitude.


I have found that people who been treated bad in their lives by others sometimes come up with this solution. For instance, a lot of people who have been abused and mistreated. For instance, porn stars are over represented in the "Care for animal rights". I just think, these people see animals as innocent being meanwhile for them, their standard view of humans as a race are very negative.

 

[WrikaWrek]

You know, it does get hard when some of you aren't actually interested in debating but rather just throwing shit in the air, and choose to avoid those who pose questions that give you trouble.

Whites vs blacks. Hetero vs Homo. Man vs Women. High class vs low class. Man vs Animals.

There are a lot of religious reasons, and a lot of educational reasons to think in a certain way. It's the holier than though that throws people off.

Fact. We aren't more important for the ecosystem than animals.
Fact. Protecting those you care for is as basic as instinct.

There's nothing selfish about it, unless you believe in God. Unless everything we do is selfish...which bar some exceptions, everyone of us is being selfish most of the time.

I don't agree. Humans are above animals.

In the food chain sure. But that's not how we live, because if we actually cared about natural selection then we wouldn't be a society that protects the weak.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I don't agree. Humans are above animals.

I mean... you can disagree, but biologically, humans are animals. That fact is indisputable.

Edit: And since the universe is essentially indifferent to everything, the idea that humans are "higher" than anything else is an essentially species-centric view. I think that sapience and humanity has intrinsic value because we are the only proof of consciousness in the universe, but ultimately, the universe would not notice our loss any more or less than the loss of dogs or rocks or volcanoes.

 

[scar tissue]

Unless everything we do is selfish...which bar some exceptions, everyone of us is being selfish most of the time.

This is the correct answer. Everyone is selfish most of the time. Selfish genes and all.

 

[MThanded]

Sounds a lot like a certain Adolf.

 

[tycoonheart]

People are acting as if random strangers don't do anything for you or that they are assholes. The random stranger could be a scientist, cop, social worker. Also are people really saying they would let a little girl or a mother die in order to save their pet, c'mon guys that is a little fucked up.

What exactly is fucked up about that? If I see my dog and two other people in danger, I know I'm going to go save my dog first. My dog has given me a lot of joy and I will never ever sacrifice his life for someone random.

 

[DY_nasty]

Those you care about?

I could love an octopus like a brother. Its still an octopus to everyone but me. I really didn't think some were that selfish but wow.

 

[Big-E]

I don't agree. Humans are above animals.

Then you have a different definition of the word animal than most and I guess some people have a different definition of the word family than you do. Shocking, words that have a varied meaning in society have a varied meaning among people. Let me attack your definition of animal for being wrong and judge you as having deep social issues for thinking that way.

 

[TommyT]

Those you care about?

I could love an octopus like a brother. Its still an octopus to everyone but me. I really didn't think some were that shellfish but wow.

Was really hoping that pun would come.

 

[DY_nasty]

Sounds a lot like a certain Adolf and a bunch of other cold blooded killers with the same attitude.


I have found that people who been treated bad in their lives by others sometimes come up with this solution. For instance, a lot of people who have been abused and mistreated. For instance, porn stars are over represented in the "Care for animal rights". I just think, these people see animals as innocent being meanwhile for them, their standard view of humans as a race are very negative.

Wut

 

[CornBurrito]

Some in this thread claim that others are sociopaths because they say "you can just get a new dog." They know that you can't just replace it, but they know the full breadth and depth of human suffering when it comes to the loss of a loved one. They know that an animal, simple and of basic intelligence isn't capable of the same kind of achievement or development of relationships that humans are capable of. People who say that humans don't have more value than other animals are also objectively wrong. In reality, nature is dictated by the principle of the survival of the fittest, and there is intrinsic value in being the fittest despite whether or not it fits in your simplistic worldview. Humans aren't just the top of the food chain, they are the only species, perhaps in the entire universe, capable of progressing socially and technologically and they deserve their position on the pedestal.

Your understanding of evolution is laughable. Fitness is defined as the ability to produce viable offspring.\

So you seriously can't imagine why human life is inheritly valuable to humans as a species, individuals and to society? You are right in that some apes are smarter than humans. You are living proof.

So you have no logical reason for why human life is more valuable than nonhuman life in 100% cases.

 

[WrikaWrek]

Those you care about?

I could love an octopus like a brother. Its still an octopus to everyone but me. I really didn't think some were that selfish but wow.

So you would let your better half die, if that meant you could save someone who meant more for more people.

 

[Angry Fork]

I don't agree. Humans are above animals.

All humans? This is why I asked the Charles Manson/K9 thing before.

It's all relative in that manner and some people place more value on their dog than on a random stranger who they have no connection with. I (and others) gave reasons why they would feel this way as well. You haven't combated those reasons at all except "it's just a dog".

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Your understanding of evolution is laughable. Fitness is defined as the ability to produce viable offspring.

Pretty much. Evolution and "survival of the fittest" exists as a means of explaining why the world is the way that it is, not to establish value or to privilege one thing above another. The food chain is a metaphor convenient for us, not some hardwired universal fact that means that things on top of the food chain are better.

 

[Riposte]

I think krypt0nian's point is agreeable, spoken with a realistic harshness of a bad situation. Threads like these turn me off Off Topic. People are making value judgments and then comparing them and the result is childish mudslinging. It seems the basics of OT discussion is to make your opponent sound like a troll for having his position, make it sound like an atrocity. From there you have a good excuse to basically treat the other poster like a piece of shit (which usually means at that point there is no discussion to be had at all). I get the feeling if you flat out called anyone a "fucking moron", especially as a junior and that's all you wrote, on the Gaming side people would look at you like a crazy person.

EDIT: I deleted the line "Have any Nazi comparisons have been made yet?" because I thought it would be in bad taste. Hmmm.

EDIT: Actually I'm sure perfectnight would/has called someone a "fucking moron" on the gaming board.

 

[cutmeamango]

Your understanding of evolution is laughable. Fitness is defined as the ability to produce viable offspring.

I addressed the fact that in his post he goes in a biological wander of reason, yet biologically we "objectively" are not of any more value than other animals.

He later addressed that humans are a more valuable species to our social structure than others.

---

Then we have others saying humans are not animals.

Could someone provide a reasoning of this affirmative?

 

[anaron]

Wait. So, the same people that are labeling certain others as "despicable human beings" are basically equating a pet's life akin to owning a vase of flowers - and Yet, they're championing out proper moral behaviour?

Lawd

 

[bananas]

I hope some advance alien civilization comes along and tries to destroy everything on Earth.

Spoiler

But they'll be caught up having an intellectual and moral debate over whether human and dogs lives are less important than that of their own species.

 

[Byakuya769]

In this world, some people have disgusting views. I will call them like I see them. I'm sorry that this particular view tends to be more in vogue with GAF than racist, homophobic, and sexist views.

 

[Tomat]

Depends on the person, but I consider my dog a member of my family.

There are cases I can think of where I'd save my dog over some piece of shit. Is that so wrong?

 

[Metroid Killer]

Wait. So, the same people that are labeling certain others as "despicable human beings" are basically equating a pet's life akin to owning a vase of flowers - and Yet, they're championing out proper moral behaviour?

Lawd

OP said it the best himself:

You can get another dog. You can't get another mother/father/sister/brother. Also a person's death has a far greater impact, especially when they may be the provider for many others.

Can't wait for the big breakthrough in cloning, then you can just get another brother!! And all will be fine!

Spoiler

I know it was bad wording on his behalf, just want to tease him

 

[Plywood]

Humans are animals

Dogs are animals

Spoiler

But they'll be caught up having an intellectual and moral debate over whether human and dogs lives are less important than that of their own species.

They'll come to the conclusion that dogs are cuter and thus wipeout the human race.

 

[MThanded]

OP said it the best himself:
Can't wait for the big breakthrough in cloning, then you can just get another brother!! And all will be fine!

Spoiler

I know it was bad wording on his behalf, just want to tease him

I have no started mudslinging at all. Thanks for bringing me into this.

 

[scar tissue]

In this world, some people have disgusting views. I will call them like I see them. I'm sorry that this particular view tends to be more in vogue with GAF than racist, homophobic, and sexist views.

Actually, speciesism is up there with racism, homophobia and sexism in terms of being disgusting.
If two creatures have the same emotions and intelligence, none can be considered more valuable unless you're a speciesist.
Saying a mentally handicapped person on the same level as a chimp is worth more is like saying a woman is worth more than a man or a black person is worth more than an asian person: the two are different, but equal in all aspects that count (emotional and intellectual stuff).

 

[apana]

I hope some advance alien civilization comes along and tries to destroy everything on Earth.

[spoilr]But they'll be caught up having an intellectual and moral debate over whether human and dogs lives are less important than that of their own species.[/spoiler]

Humans have reached a level where it would be wrong for an alien to kill us even if they are smarter. I would put you in jail if you shot a monkey in cold blood. Aliens probably wouldn't do anything bad though, this idea of aliens taking over the world is just humans projecting their own ambitions onto imaginary beings.

 

[bananas]

In this world, some people have disgusting views. I will call them like I see them. I'm sorry that this particular view tends to be more in vogue with GAF than racist, homophobic, and sexist views.

How subtle. Comparing your opponents to racists, sexists and homophobes.

Jesus, people. Can we tone down the demagogy. Can you guys debate without turning your opponents into the worst things ever?

 

[Angry Fork]

Depends on the person, but I consider my dog a member of my family.

There are cases I can think of where I'd save my dog over some piece of shit. Is that so wrong?

Apparently your views are similar to a racist/sexist/homophobe.

 

[Byakuya769]

How subtle. Comparing your opponents to racists, sexists and homophobes.

Jesus, people. Can we tone down the demagogy. Can you guys debate without turning your opponents into the worst things ever?

The views are abhorrent. I'm sorry.

 

[Metroid Killer]

I have no started mudslinging at all. Thanks for bringing me into this.

Haha I'm just screwing with you! But you did create a place for this discussion and for that you deserve punishment

 

[scar tissue]

The views are abhorrent. I'm sorry.

I still haven't gotten a good reply on this:

Saying a mentally handicapped person on the same level as a chimp is worth more is like saying a woman is worth more than a man or a black person is worth more than an asian person: the two are different, but equal in all aspects that count (emotional and intellectual stuff).

Got any actual arguments or are you just calling everyone an asshole?