7 ms·
As someone who has lost friends and family members, as well as pets, it feels the same. I see this dichotomy quite a bit in the public discourse, regarding dog
by Sholmesy 8y ago
As someone who has lost friends and family members, as well as pets, it feels the same.
I see this dichotomy quite a bit in the public discourse, regarding dogs especially, where 1/2 the world treats dogs as family and the other half thinks they are some play toy/object.
We have been living with wolves/dogs for a long time now, we're responsible for how they have evolved, and part of that is how they have evolved to bond with humans. It's not surprising to me that losing a dog feels like losing a child for some people.
- throwaway713 8y agoI appreciate you responding and explaining your perspective, even though we may disagree on the issue. > 1/2 the world treats dogs as family Do you think that half the world, if given the choice between saving either their dog or a stranger's child in a disaster situation (e.g. a house fire), would choose their dog?
- Sholmesy 8y agoI have family friends who were unable to conceive. They have had border collies all their lives, who were all astonishingly clever (not just "tricks", but just with intuition etc). These dogs are basically their children. The "child" part of your hypothetical makes it difficult to know. I think they would save their own dog over an adult, however they are both very compassionate and love kids so I imagine it would be difficult to fight that human impulse to protect a child.
- tallanvor 8y agoIt wouldn't surprise me at all. My dog is part of my family. She comes before any stranger.
- throwaway713 8y agoI can't argue with an opinion, but this is just mind-blowing to me. Judging by everyone else's comments, it doesn't appear like yours is an isolated opinion either. I'm just at a total loss for words. I had no idea so many people value animal life above human life.
- msl 8y agoWhat if they value all animals' (that is, including humans') lives equally? Would you rather save someone close to you or a stranger?
- ikurei 8y agoI don't think (yeah, please answer if I'm wrong) that's true for anyone. You may value a dogs life as much as a human, some do. But those same people don't go around with extreme care to avoid stepping on an ant, and would kill insects if they where an annoyance or risk to health. So they do stablish a difference between some animals, where ants are in a different tier than dogs, but humans and dogs are together in the same tier. Personally I don't think it makes any sense. I do value animal lives greatly, and between a dog and a man I might save the dog in a split-second gut decision (and regret it later). I reckon many people use feelings to guide (or greatly inform) their morality. Which might or might not be that bad to be honest, I don't really have a solid basis for my morality either.
- tallanvor 8y agoI don't think you understand the unconditional love that a dog has for its owner, and the commitment good people make when they choose to get one. For me it is moral and ethical that I put the safety and well being of my dog above people. That doesn't mean that I don't care about others, and it doesn't mean that I would ignore trying to save them once my dog was safe, but it is what is right for me.
- Sholmesy 8y agoThis comes closest to how I feel. You are responsible for your dog, unlike a stranger. The dog trusts you entirely and would do anything for you.
- eeeuo 8y agoI love my pets profoundly. I have sacrificed immensely for them. But I would blow my brains out if I let a little girl burn to death so that I could save my dog.
- barrkel 8y agoThere would be more social opprobrium to save the pet, and the grief would undoubtedly be greater if the pet died instead. If nobody was looking, I think most would save their pet. Unknown unrelated people simply aren't very important. Wars would be impossible if it were otherwise.
- scarejunba 8y agoInteresting. Do you ever test your hypotheses? Here is some evidence regarding your "most" claim. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animals-and-us/201306/would-you-save-puppy-or-child-burning-building%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog...
- adar 8y agoTest his hypothesis how, exactly? By putting a child and a dog into a disaster situation?
- scarejunba 8y agoExamples available in the link in the comment you responded to. In order to attempt to falsify a hypothesis you don't need to necessarily run a direct experiment on it. In fact, few things are testable like that. Anyway, I think I have what I need to know as to how he tests his ideas.
- barrkel 8y agoSo 40% admit that they would save their own dog over a foreign tourist, when asked. Now, ask yourself how many would save their own dog if they weren't being asked or observed (and implicitly judged)? I consider the link fairly strong evidence for my claim.
- scarejunba 8y agoVery interesting knowledge acquisition technique. Thank you for sharing.
- mynameishere 8y agoDude, you're arguing with crazy people. Just forget it.
- Sholmesy 8y agoIt's not constructive to call people crazy =\ This is a fairly divisive issue (what my original comment was about), and further ostracizing either side of the debate is not productive.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- harimau777 8y agoThis situation probably doesn't apply to people on HN, but as a thought experiment: In a pre-industrial society or one where rule of law has broken down I could see a situation where the labor and protection provided by an animal made them a part of the family in a very real way. In those circumstances I could see that the life of an animal might be much more important than the life of an outsider; even if only in a strictly practical sense. Note that I'm not necessarily trying to argue whether that would be correct in a moral sense.
- throwaway-dogs 8y agoYes, absolutely. I know I personally would. Now, if it was between a stranger dog and a stranger child I'd choose the child.
- andrepd 8y agoThen you are a terrible and deeply selfish person.
- throwaway-dogs 8y agoWhy? This may be how you feel, but you have no reasoning to back it.
- andrepd 8y agoI do. See my other post.
- belorn 8y agoChange that scenario just so slightly and I would bet that answers would significant change: Do you think a dog owner would risk their own life (to varied degrees) to rescue a family dog if their house started burning?
- Sholmesy 8y agoThis is an excellent pivot of the original question, and I think the obvious answer for most answers is yes.
- glangdale 8y agoI'm going to say after reading some of the other responses that there's something seriously fucked up about the idea that you would save your dog. If you even, for a minute, thought that saving a dog with a life expectancy of 10-20 years tops living as a pet for someone's indulgence is remotely comparable to saving a child - who might live to 80 as an independent being - give yourself an uppercut. I'm a dog lover and love my dog, but I would sacrifice her in a heartbeat for a child - any child, regardless of whose it is.
- SCHiM 8y agoThis is exactly it! Why don't people feel that they should sacrifice themselves and carry their grief and their emotional loss, and save the child? I agree with some others in this thread, those that would save their pet are selfish beyond my wildest imagination. To save themselves the grief of losing a subjective family member they sacrifice human life for what is to outside observers just an animal. Be as you want to be, but in this I feel justified in judging those people most harshly indeed.
- glangdale 8y agoAlso, while this is a wild hypothetical, a lot of uncritical celebrators of their dog's apparently human-like right to life and liberty seem overly willing to make the choice between (a) a hypothetical threat to their dog's continued liberty and (b) an unconscionable threat to the well-being of other people - kids, particularly - around them. Everyone who has a dog of some sort of 'questionable breed' who doesn't do everything in their power to socialize and control said breed is gambling with the lives of the animals, humans (kids and adults) around them. The demented sentimentalizing of All Sacred Canine Life has cost a few humans theirs instead.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- sctb 8y agoSometimes these sorts of hypotheticals lead to interesting discussion and insights, but other times we get this sort of thing. Sparks are just sparks, but we should be careful because of the possibility of utterly bleak flamewars such as this.
- onetimemanytime 8y ago>>As someone who has lost friends and family members, as well as pets, it feels the same. No doubt to many it feels the same. Others may feel that their pet is more valuable than the entire world. But let's be realistic, if a driver kills your dog you will not be awarded $x-$xx million. Now if they run over grandma or worse, a child...
- Sholmesy 8y agoSure, that's a financial/legal thing though, which is fairly detached from human emotion.
- onetimemanytime 8y ago>>Sure, that's a financial/legal thing though, which is fairly detached from human emotion. That's the "It happened. We're sorry, how do we go from here..." thing. At some point it has to be valued by others. I also said that emotion is relative.
- sigi45 8y agoWould be nice if people would be less selfish. We bread dogs to a form where there pure existens is our contact with them. We bread them in forms and colors as we see fit. We bread them in forms which makes it hard for them to breath, which gives them cancer with a high rate. We should stop buying dogs because we like dogs. We should stop putting them in small appartments and get a service for handling our dogs because its inconvinient.