Would you save your pet or a stranger's child?

[NotADailyMailJournalist]

Hello all

Slightly inspired by another thread where posters were surprised that people were more interested in someone's dog than their baby...

If you have a cat/dog and you could only save it or a stranger's child/baby, what would you choose?

For the purposes of this thread, no-one would ever find out you'd been given the choice, so you wouldn't face any consequences.

Thanks

No, they wouldn’t.

Are you going with psychotic or psychopathic? Because they’re different things too. I don’t mind you thinking that, because as I have said more than once you’re free to think what you like, the only reason we’re going over this is because you keep replying to tell me that it’s specifically psychopathic behavior when it isn’t. Like I’ve also repeatedly said, I don’t mind you calling me psychopathic either, but if you’re going to then do it based on behaviour that does display psychopathic tendencies.

All this time you could have just gone with ‘cruel’, ‘sick’, ‘disgusting’, ‘disturbing’ etc. Still predictable, but much more nebulous and open to interpretation.

I’ve already given you examples when I used the definition quote. Just because you didn’t agree they relate to you or the situation doesn’t make that correct.

Would you like me to get the DSM and go through each point. I’m sure you’d have a come back and disagree with those examples too.

And I pointed out how you incorrectly applied the definition. I wasn’t disputing Hare, I was disputing your understanding of him in your desire to make an action you disapprove of fit.

I expect you would do exactly the same with the DSM V on the off chance you found ‘psychopathic tendencies’ in there, or indeed ‘psychopathy’. Not that you were trying to say it was actually psychopathic, apparently.

(You want the Hare Psychopathic Checklist, but alas you can’t apply that as a layperson over the internet)

I didn’t incorrectly apply the definition. There is not one specific scenario that the quote applies to. It can be applied to many situations, circumstances and people. Again, psychopathic tendencies doesn’t infer a diagnosis, you seem to be missing that point spectacularly.

I never said you would get an official diagnosis of a psychopath made by a Psychiatrist. In the same way someone could have autistic traits and that’s acknowledged, but doesn’t mean they would get a diagnosis.

It’s almost as if you’re trying to deflect and be obtuse…..

Only on MN would you get a scenario where someone had to chose to save the life of a baby or a dog and they say ‘Nahh sod the baby, let it die…..grab the dog and save it’

(And then get upset and argue when someone says that’s the kind of thing someone would do if they had psychopathic tendencies - You couldn’t make it up!)

If you don't have autism, you don't have autistic traits. If you aren't a psychopath, you don't have psychopathic traits. A lack of empathy in certain situations isn't exclusive to psychopaths. Some autistic people struggle with empathy, people who have gone through abusive childhoods can struggle with empathy, people with PTSD can struggle with empathy etc.

You could equally have said:
"Because only someone with autistic tendencies would save a dog - (yes even their own dog!!) over a baby!"

And rightly, people would have pulled you up on that too.

Of course people can have autistic traits but they don’t meet the full diagnostic criteria. That’s actually quite common.

This is nothing to do with autism I was just using that as example.

They have traits that are common in autism, yes, but they aren't exclusive to autism. They don't belong to autism.

So, like I said, a lack of empathy in certain situations isn't exclusive to psychopathy. And just because psychopaths struggle with empathy doesn't mean everyone who struggles with empathy has "psychopathic tendencies" as you put it.

That you don’t want to accept that you applied it incorrectly doesn’t mean that you didn’t, in fact, apply it incorrectly. You ascribed motivations to people that reflected only your distaste at their (hypothetical) actions, rather than their actual motivations or feelings. That’s intro level stuff in How Not To Psychologically Analyse 101.

If you aren’t trying to diagnose someone then I’m not sure what your purpose is in quoting the definition and trying to (incorrectly) apply it.

I’m not sure why you keep trying to insist I’m upset at being called a psychopath/having psychopathic tendencies, considering I haven’t even denied being a psychopath, or having them . What I have said is that if you’re going to call me, or anyone, one, then at least point to something that supports the statement. Try not to pick one that demonstrates empathy towards another living being, human or animal.

I think I know what’s happened here. You thought that I meant the lack of empathy so I used autism as an example. That’s not the case at all. I was just pointing out that people have can traits of something but they don’t meet the full criteria. Like someone can struggle socially but they don’t have repetitive stereotypical for example. People can struggle through and told that they meet some of the criteria but not all and it’s sad all around because there is no help for them.

They used to call it PDD-NOS where they acknowledge the difficulties but couldn’t gown the person a diagnosis.

It really wasn’t about autism.

I have pointed out, you don’t agree that’s fine. You’re entitled to your thoughts and opinions even thought they are wrong. (imo)

If believing I’m wrong makes you feel better then by all means go for it, but what I’ve said tallies with every scientific body that concerns itself with the study and treatment of abnormal psychology. Feel free to take it up with any of them. Maybe write a paper for a medical journal or something.

Nope. I am using autism as an example of other people who may, in your opinion, have "psychopathic tendencies" because they struggle with empathy in some situations.

Ah I see. So you think I shouldn’t call someone a psycho that would let a baby die in order to save an animal?

Thanks for your advice but forgive me if I wouldn’t act on it considering our polar opposite views on the situation.

To summarise then, if I seen a headline in the news that said a baby died in a house fire but an animal was saved instead, hence the baby died. I would be appalled. I would turn to my DH and say oh my goodness what kind of psycho leave a baby to die in order to save as animal. I would absolutely judge them for it and think how tragic for the babies parents.

It’s irrelevant to me if you disagree. That’s exactly what I’d think and I know most of my friends and family would feel the same.

You can call someone whatever you like. It says more about your ignorance than about the person you're name-calling.

If such a situation did occur and was in the news, there would be many people saying far worse. My sympathies would be with the parents.

This thread has gone nasty.

I love my dog, and am bonded with her. Me saving her over a stranger's child would be something my instincts would have me do. I would not even be looking for a child, and why would I? Where are the parents? Why do they escape judgement for not saving their own kid?

Is everyone missing the bit in the OP where is says no one would know you had the choice?

I am just struggling here with the level of judgement and name calling at people who would choose their pet, in a purely hypothetical situation that is so absurd and impossible. It is never going to happen... yet the arm chair shrinks are out in force labelling anyone who would not choose the same as them.
I think that says more about them than the people who are so say "psychopaths".

I’m obsessed with my cat 🤣 and I love her to death but how can you compare a human baby and a cat. Unfortunately you can’t. I’d save the baby.

As opposed to all the childless people who love seeing kids in pain 😂

Save the child, of course.

Because it’s a human baby!!!

That I have zero attachment to. Where are the parents?
Why am I alone with this baby?

Why would I get the label of a psychopath over a scenario that is never going to happen? Thought police, much?

They too would be free to think what they like.

Spoken by the MN police.

Ask the OP where the mum is…

I just don't understand the name calling over something that has not happened, and will never happen. It makes no sense to me at all.

This is why humans are shit tbh.

🙄 Nice…