Would you save the dog or the human?

Discussion in 'Every Day Debating' started by Anir, Jun 7, 2009.

  1. Overread

    Overread Wolfing it up! Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,537
    Likes Received:
    232
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +342 / 1 / -0
    As an interesting point - humans are about the only animal life recorded (thus far) which actively destroys its own living environment. Almost all other animals (when not moved across vast distances by people) will cause change, but will eventually settled into a level of balance with the ecosystem they live within. This balance won't necessarily be on an annual basis, but over the longer term whilst populations will shift there will be balance.
    At a simple level if you have many deer you'll gain many wolves - who will eat the deer and thus lower the deer population. As a result you've less deer and thus fewer wolves can be supported - wolf populations are forced to lower and thus with fewer predators the deer can repopulate (alongside this you'd also have shifts in the deer's food supply - dwindling as the deer population grows and then regrowing as the population of deer reduces).

    Humans are the only ones which essentially don't operate within this pattern of behaviour - we are capable of moving into an area and actively resulting in the destruction of multiple parts of the ecosystem, even those parts which we make direct use of.
     
  2. Lord Yuan

    Lord Yuan Death-Thousand+

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,068
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Crystal Prison (space crime)
    Ratings:
    +162 / 0 / -0
    You are only looking at the negatives. Do animals try to understand the universe and record knowledge? Do animals cure diseases and disabilities?

    What good is an environment if it isn't understood? Animals are a living example of the saying "ignorance is bliss". They can be happy and we can help them, but what is their happiness worth if they don't have an enlightened grasp on reality? Even if the whole world is nuked but we send out a single capsule into space with all of our knowledge I'd say it was a worthwhile sacrifice.

    Animals will live and die until Earth is consumed by the Sun, and then it won't matter what the state of the ecosystem is when it happens.
     
  3. Crouton

    Crouton New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    3,523
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0
    Maybe ignorance in this case really is bliss. Animals just live. Because they don't try to understand everything they also don't destroy anything. This planet would last for thousands of more years if only animals lived here because there would no one species ruining everything. Humans have basically doomed this planet in the future. It's a shame. I don't know what we'll do next. Probably go to another planet and destroy that one too. Humans did that. Not animals.

    As I said I don't hate all people or anything like that, I just wish we weren't' so stupid in the past. I wish I could go back and slap our ancestors and tell them it's not a good idea. There are ways that humans, the environment and technology can live together but we've already screwed up everything too much in the past to rally do that properly.
     
  4. Lord Yuan

    Lord Yuan Death-Thousand+

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,068
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Crystal Prison (space crime)
    Ratings:
    +162 / 0 / -0
    I don't know, I've always had the sort of life mentality. I'd rather burn out quick in a brilliant flame, than exist doing nothing and changing nothing. I've sussed out the whole reason for my being as a unlikely attempt to tackle an unrecognized problem that won't be fixed by the end of my lifetime. But I'd rather dig us deeper to escape than try to imagine different ways we could have gone, or attempt to climb back up the oubliette we've made, because I think if we progress with our technology enough we may become near entirely independent from any of nature other than maybe sunlight and some kind of similar perpetual fuel.

    And you can't assume that people would just wreck a whole new planet if we got to one. I'd consider the possibility of us introducing some of Earth's more resilient life forms to foreign planets to possibly create new ecosystems there over vast periods of time.

    Our current knowledge could preserve and protect anything for near-eternity if we push our effort to the limit, because of this I think I mistakes were worthwhile sacrifices to leave behind a grand legacy.
     
  5. Crouton

    Crouton New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    3,523
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0
    I get that you like knowledge. I like it to, I just don't like the cost at which we gained it. I feel sorry for nature, for all the animals murdered, butchered in the name of humans. For all the natural wonders destroyed, for all the land bulldozed down and the species that have gone extinct due to us. I get the whole "going out in a flame" thing but I can't accept taking everything else with us, especially when they had no part in this at all.
     
  6. Lord Yuan

    Lord Yuan Death-Thousand+

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,068
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Crystal Prison (space crime)
    Ratings:
    +162 / 0 / -0
    I don't feel good about the sacrifices we've made, but with the potential to guarantee something greater for everybody and everything even wiping out species is worth it. Nature is only about survival itself, in due time species would cycle out anyway. I can't agree with the idea of preserving every different species that exists as nature will continue to forge more potent species that more effectively adapt to their environment.

    I only fear people will try to halt the technological push when it is our only way to permanently fix things from getting worse.
     
  7. Turambar

    Turambar Harebrained Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,784
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Not in Amsterdam :)
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0
    You take quite a gloomy outlook on life. Of course, you've got a point. We consider this planet to be ours, our home. And, yet, we're not exactly keeping a tidy place.

    As a species, though, you could say that we are the most successful species in the history of biology. This fact of disbalance alone has repercussions on our environment. Every overly successful species has the tendency to destroy. In that respect, we're not much different than animals...

    If your point is: the dog deserves saving because humanity is intrinsically evil, then I think I should have to retort that no, humans are no more evil than other species. And that we are exactly doing what biology predicts us to do, voiding our assumed evilness.

    That, and you can't judge individuals based on the merits of an entire species.
     
  8. Crouton

    Crouton New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    3,523
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0
    I said the dog deserved to be saving if it was down to several different factors. In some situations I would save the dog, in some I would save the human. It depends on various factors surrounding the situation. I never once said I would always save the dog and never the human. I also never said I judged individuals based on an entire species. My exact words actually were that I don't like humanity as a whole but I have faith in individual people. As for saying humans are no move evil than any other species. Maybe not all humans, but many individual humans are pretty damn evil. Moreso than any animal I've ever heard of.
     
  9. Foinikas

    Foinikas Playing backgammon!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    VDNH Station,Moscow
    Ratings:
    +97 / 0 / -0
    I wonder how the people who would save the dog feel if someone preferred the dog than them if they were to get drowned....
     
  10. Gayle Miller

    Gayle Miller New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Simple, the cat. The man is obviously a thief and tried to nick my pet. If the dog was in the water then the chances are that the dog was trying to save the man since dogs can swim. If the dog is drowning then the man is guilty of trying to drown the dog since all he would need to do is hold on (assuming the man is not caught on weeds or some such thing). If they had been in a boat and it had capsized then there would be wreckage for the man to hold on to and then he could help the cat or dog to safety. Since the cause of the commotion is unclear my answer would always be to save the animal first.
    Of course he could have dived into the water to try and save the animal if it fell overboard or something and is drowning because of his attempt to save the animal. By saving the animal first the man may stop struggling and drowning. With the animal safe, I could then to go to the man's aid should he require it.
     
  11. Foinikas

    Foinikas Playing backgammon!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    VDNH Station,Moscow
    Ratings:
    +97 / 0 / -0
    Right...so if you're somehow hanging from a cliff and someone has to choose either you or the dog,you would just say "Yes,I understand and respect your decision" when he announces to you that he will prefer to save the dog than you.
     
  12. Gayle Miller

    Gayle Miller New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Absolutely and no I don't say that flippantly. I would encourage the person to save the animal first. The question would be why was I daft enough to go near the edge of a cliff in the first place when I have a fear of heights? If I fell over the edge of a cliff I'd have no-one to blame but myself, so saving the animal would be the right thing to do.
     
  13. Foinikas

    Foinikas Playing backgammon!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    VDNH Station,Moscow
    Ratings:
    +97 / 0 / -0
    So you'd really ask the guy to save the dog and let you die?
     
  14. Hammerheart

    Hammerheart New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0
    not reading thru any of the other posts but my answer is dog regardless of the circumstances. f*ck humans...
     
  15. Gayle Miller

    Gayle Miller New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Yep. I'd hope the person would be able to save both but my primary concern would be for the animal. You could argue that self preservation would kick in but my self preservation would encourage me to hold on tight to the cliff for as long as I could. Knowing there was someone there would fuel my hope of survival on and make me dig deeper into my reserves.
     
  16. Foinikas

    Foinikas Playing backgammon!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    VDNH Station,Moscow
    Ratings:
    +97 / 0 / -0
    Ok if you insist I won't say anything.
     
  17. Lord Yuan

    Lord Yuan Death-Thousand+

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,068
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Crystal Prison (space crime)
    Ratings:
    +162 / 0 / -0
    The legitimate "**** humans" mentality makes me want to burn myself alive. It goes against all meaning I've given my life. WE ARE HUMANS! Nihilism won't do anything for anybody. As a species of animal we have put people on the moon, cured diseases, found out how to cure animal diseases, and we learn more about physics, chemistry,biology, every day. We are making incredible technologies and computers and machines that help us do all of this faster and open up more options for us.

    All of this is happening while people mope around on the internet saying things like all people suck or animal life is better than human life. Here is a sad reality, objectively human life isn't even all equal. Sure we are taking steps to make true natural equality, we shouldn't be discouraged just because people on TV say dumb things or because people do ungainly things because nature does ungainly things too and it will even if you get your wish and we do all rot so animals can be free to make absolutely no progress on top of our incredible research until they evolve and do exactly what we did and then some animals will say "boy we sure are dumb and lame, I really feel bad for animals".

    Our lives, the lives of animals, are SO short that happiness and comfort are negligible. In the grand span of time no body will care if you had a good or bad day, or if your dog is sad, or if a bird has to make a new nest. Species will flourish and die out if we are here or not. New better life will evolve. All that matters to me is that humans can have a sense of duty and foresight to maybe make a better world for ourselves, and animals too if we have the chance.
     
  18. Foinikas

    Foinikas Playing backgammon!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    VDNH Station,Moscow
    Ratings:
    +97 / 0 / -0
    So you'd save the man?
     
  19. Lord Yuan

    Lord Yuan Death-Thousand+

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,068
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Crystal Prison (space crime)
    Ratings:
    +162 / 0 / -0
    In this scenario certainly! Objectively a single human can do a ton more good for other animals than a single animal could do even. I don't care to worry about the personality of the person or animal because that is trivial when deciding to save a life or not.
     
  20. Foinikas

    Foinikas Playing backgammon!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    VDNH Station,Moscow
    Ratings:
    +97 / 0 / -0
    Wait a minute.If the man didn't do good for animals,would you still save him?