14 ms·

Chickens are sentient. Would you have changed your answer if it were chickens? I chose to save the human as the prompt didn't set a bar for the level of sentie

Chickens are sentient. Would you have changed your answer if it were chickens? I chose to save the human as the prompt didn't set a bar for the level of sentience. Also partly because of shameless speciesism. I love animals, have gone mostly vegetarian, but I would still save a human over any other animal.

Semaphor 4y ago
> I chose to save the human as the prompt didn't set a bar for the level of sentience. That’s actually a very good point, I made more assumptions than the text gave cause for.
yardstick 4y ago
Would you save a fit, healthy monkey that can communicate with us using sign language, or would you save a human in a permanent coma? (Or whose brain is damaged and will only ever have the mind of a 1 year old)
- bckr 4y ago
  coma: monkey brain damage: now there's a hard one
- spoonjim 4y ago
  Wouldn't sacrifice any humans for a billion monkeys
  - yardstick 4y ago
    Would you save a monkey whose body contains antibodies for the cure for cancer for humans (or AIDS/HIV/whatever), or 1 human?
    - spoonjim 4y ago
      The monkey. The answer would be the same for just a vial of the antibodies, the monkey is completely incidental.
  - McBeige 4y ago
    If you were a monkey, would you sacrifice a billion humans to save a monkey? Or equivalently, would you sacrifice a billion humans to save a robot that's twice as sentient as the average human?
    - spoonjim 4y ago
      I cannot really say what I would do if I was a monkey, it's like asking me what a circle with corners would look like. Too far outside my ability to imagine. I wouldn't sacrifice any number of humans to save any kind of robot either, unless it was a robot critical to human survival like a surgical robot in the middle of a natural disaster.
- robbomacrae 4y ago
  I would choose the human in both situations. Lots of animals die due to our existence and not just for our food. We accidentally kill things all the time with our vehicles and the pollution we cause. I wish it wasn't the case but you can't step outside without ruining some ants day. To then be faced with a choice between killing one more animal or a human... my heart would bleed for the monkey but to do anything else would be murder and pretty hypocritical unless one lives an extremely vegan and eco friendly lifestyle. No medical issue will strip away the fact that it is a human life. I'll make it more absurd for you... they could have a terminal disease and likely be dead tomorrow and I'd still choose to sacrifice the monkey to give them 24 more hours.

Semaphor 4y ago

> I chose to save the human as the prompt didn't set a bar for the level of sentience. That’s actually a very good point, I made more assumptions than the text gave cause for.

yardstick 4y ago

Would you save a fit, healthy monkey that can communicate with us using sign language, or would you save a human in a permanent coma? (Or whose brain is damaged and will only ever have the mind of a 1 year old)

bckr 4y ago
coma: monkey brain damage: now there's a hard one
spoonjim 4y ago
Wouldn't sacrifice any humans for a billion monkeys
- yardstick 4y ago
  Would you save a monkey whose body contains antibodies for the cure for cancer for humans (or AIDS/HIV/whatever), or 1 human?
  - spoonjim 4y ago
    The monkey. The answer would be the same for just a vial of the antibodies, the monkey is completely incidental.
- McBeige 4y ago
  If you were a monkey, would you sacrifice a billion humans to save a monkey? Or equivalently, would you sacrifice a billion humans to save a robot that's twice as sentient as the average human?
  - spoonjim 4y ago
    I cannot really say what I would do if I was a monkey, it's like asking me what a circle with corners would look like. Too far outside my ability to imagine. I wouldn't sacrifice any number of humans to save any kind of robot either, unless it was a robot critical to human survival like a surgical robot in the middle of a natural disaster.
robbomacrae 4y ago
I would choose the human in both situations. Lots of animals die due to our existence and not just for our food. We accidentally kill things all the time with our vehicles and the pollution we cause. I wish it wasn't the case but you can't step outside without ruining some ants day. To then be faced with a choice between killing one more animal or a human... my heart would bleed for the monkey but to do anything else would be murder and pretty hypocritical unless one lives an extremely vegan and eco friendly lifestyle. No medical issue will strip away the fact that it is a human life. I'll make it more absurd for you... they could have a terminal disease and likely be dead tomorrow and I'd still choose to sacrifice the monkey to give them 24 more hours.