The Value of Life

There is a burning building and you hear the screams of a stranger and the cries of your dog/cat/pet of choice. Who do you save and why?

Edit: More details to stop people trying to have their cake and eat it haha!

The animal and the person are in different parts of the building and you only have enough time to go in one direction and then exit. You are an able bodied person.

I want to know where people's conscious takes them!

Both. Dog is small enough to carry.

I know the "right" answer is supposed to be the human because their life is worth more, but I will be honest, if my dog was still alive and I could only save one I would save my dog. I just would not be able to willingly throw away 17 years of companionship even for the more I guess objectively valuable life form. My dog is family.

and not the point of this thread but if we are going to be technical I am a 5'0" tall 90 lbs woman, if my dog was a little heavier I wouldn't even be able to save her let alone another full-sized human

@ the human



then bolt for my matt cat who i could not imagine my life without.

If I may suggest, make the human a young baby or small child, as that would carry more emotional weight.

However either way I have to go with the human life, burning to death is a horrible way to die, and I would not wish that on anyone or anything. However I just think that a human life has more to impact society and the loss of life would impact more people than a pet that would die in a few years anyway, with no one to mourn him but myself.

Okay but, if you're in the building with your pet, then it would be very easy to take it with you or to at least let it out so it can escape. Then see if you can save the person.
Frankly, I'm not currently in a condition where I could save a teenager or fully-grown human. If it came down to it, I'd save who I could save. A child, I can do something about. A small pet I can do multiple things about. I can't do shit about someone who is probably my weight of heavier in my physical state so it's more practical to save something I can and to send someone better able after those I can't.

Pragmatism whee

Added more detail because I want to know the emotional allegiance more than anything!

I would save my pet. I don't value human life over other species' and my pet is my family so it's clearly the logical choice in my mind to save the life I have a bond with over the life I don't. It would do the same for me...well if it's a dog, not so sure about a cat.

A little more radical maybe but I would also go one further and choose the life of an animal I don't have a bond with over that of a human I don't know anyway. Like I said I don't view the life of humans above animals so this is completely down to personal preference and for me I just don't have as strong an emotional response to people suffering as I do with animals suffering.

Yue Han said:

Added more detail because I want to know the emotional allegiance more than anything!

I would save my pet. I don't value human life over other species' and my pet is my family so it's clearly the logical choice in my mind to save the life I have a bond with over the life I don't. It would do the same for me...well if it's a dog, not so sure about a cat.

A little more radical maybe but I would also go one further and choose the life of an animal I don't have a bond with over that of a human I don't know anyway. Like I said I don't view the life of humans above animals so this is completely down to personal preference and for me I just don't have as strong an emotional response to people suffering as I do with animals suffering.

Click to expand...

My response is still pragmatism. Save whichever life is more practical to save.

The human. Fireman carrying 220 is easy and animals are smart enough. Leave the doors open on your way out and the animal will follow. To put it in perspective, imagine yourself as the clean up crew.

Sifting through debris and coming across the burnt, gooey corpse of an infant. Maybe the body of a woman twisted in pain and horror, frozen in death? Or the crushed skull of a man underneath a girder as he tried to crawl his way to safety?

Cats and dogs are far more easy to look upon than someone that you could have had a full conversation with a day before. Pets bring joy, but they are fleeting compared to the lifespan of another human being. The knowledge, stories, character and all they ever loved in life is snuffed out and gone, never to be told or heard again.

And the smell. Something makes us smell . . . unique. A cat or dog can smell bad, yes, but when you smell us while dead? Something clicks and there is no question what the smell is.

Cheers!

I love my cats more than I love many things in life, but if I could actually save a human instead, I would. I'd feel incredibly sorrowful about it for years, possibly forever, but I'd survive. I probably could never forgive myself if I chose cats over humans on purpose and knew that there was a big chance I could have saved the human instead.

Ugh, the right answer is the person but I can't help but to feel like they have the faculties to make it out on their own? Animals are helpless, they rely on people to help and save them.

I couldn't in good conscience leave either of them behind without wanting to eat a bullet the next day. :(

adventure said:

I love my cats more than I love many things in life, but if I could actually save a human instead, I would. I'd feel incredibly sorrowful about it for years, possibly forever, but I'd survive. I probably could never forgive myself if I chose cats over humans on purpose and knew that there was a big chance I could have saved the human instead.

Click to expand...

See that's funny because for me it's the opposite. I know I would be more emotionally traumatised over the years about that poor innocent animal I didn't save if I chose the human stranger.

I just see it as just my own personal preference that I have no control over which I think is perfectly fine.

I do find it interesting how many people feel obligation towards other humans though! I read an article online about this exact topic and was quite surprised from reading comments that the general consensus is saving the human is seen as the correct choice even from people that say they love animals and also say they generally like them more than other people.

honestly depending on the person i'd try for both. before u shoot me, i mean "depending on the person" as if it's a kid i can easily carry or someone that's twice my height, twice my weight. i tried moving a friend who's literally only a bit taller than me and damn he's unmovable. a cat/dog/rat/bird would kinda be easier for a smol if that makes sense.

but yeah i'd be the dumb shit that'll check on both.

The dog, tbh.

I'm sorry but I cannot live without my pet

I'd try to get the hell outta there asap. In such an instance I'd probably not even think about saving anybody but myself. Doesn't matter if human or not.

It's a fine dilemma in theory, but when push comes to shove, the simple answer is usually the true one. We can't all be heroes. At least I cannot.

It's all up to you how how you make your life valuable