4 ms·

i think this speaks far more to the way you value the life of people over animals. for me and my dog it's very different. if i had to choose between killing my

i think this speaks far more to the way you value the life of people over animals. for me and my dog it's very different. if i had to choose between killing my dog and letting a stranger die, i wouldn't be able to kill my dog. if i had to choose between him and my partner, he's gonna have to die. i also don't feel like human life has some intrinsic value. my dog brings a lot of love and happiness to my life. i've known a lot of people who bring pain and suffering to others. why value a person that may or may not bring happiness to the world over something that does bring happiness? i think the idea that there is a binary solution to all problems is a poor world view, but 'black and white'[0] thinking is a tell tell sign of abuse and considered a standard trauma response. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology)

notRobot 6y ago
I'm with you. As I said below: > People die all the time. Animals die all the time too. But this animal dying would have a huge negative impact on my life, whereas whether or not someone I've never met would not. I also agree with you that human life doesn't have intrinsic value. Lots of humans are "good", but lots cause a lot of pain and harm to lots of other people and animals too. So choosing a stranger of whom I know nothing over my own pet? Nope. Not doing that.
- aphextron 6y ago
  >I also agree with you that human life doesn't have intrinsic value. Then I guess this is ultimately the difference in our thinking. I hold that all human life has intrinsic value, and that that value is infinitely greater than any animal regardless of the person.