Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Animals vs humans

1002 replies

fifi669 · 01/11/2013 13:16

AIBU to think if faced with choosing a pet over a human (even if a stranger), you should choose the human?

The idea was brought up in another thread and put in life or death situation. Building on fire contains your pet and a stranger. You could only save one, who would it be?

I had a dog, Ralph, I cried my heart out when he died 3 years ago. The only dog I wasn't scared of! But I can't imagine leaving a person to die instead, no matter how my heart would break.

OP posts:
Spikeytree · 01/11/2013 16:41

I'd save my animals over a random human. No question in my mind. I don't really like many humans, but my animals have never hurt me, belittled me, frightened me or made me want to die. Humans have.

thegreylady · 01/11/2013 16:45

Human first I think but very hard to choose someone I knew was bad over a beloved pet and not at all hard to put any child before any animal.

fifi669 · 01/11/2013 16:45

And 9 times out of 10 does!

OP posts:
thegreylady · 01/11/2013 16:50

Where my dc and dgc are concerned I have always known I would kill for them/die for them-whatever. Kitty and Rover...not so much.

BackOnlyBriefly · 01/11/2013 16:57

I'm not sure what is more worrying. That so many people would let a human die to save their dog (or presumably their goldfish) or that so many people struggle with the question.

Someone asks if you would save a pet over a human or vice versa and people quibble over who started the fire, question what sort of plumber he might be, say they'd save both and try to work out if the dog could climb out the window.

Rinoachicken · 01/11/2013 17:00

^^ this

HarderToKidnap · 01/11/2013 17:01

This is a ridiculous question! If I was in a burning building I would hightail it out of there pronto, unless DS or DH were still in the house, in which case I would do my best to save them. If I saw a human or animal on my way out and I could safely grab them I would do so.

My priority is DS and he needs a mum, so I'd look after myself!

LeBFG · 01/11/2013 17:02

That's why these sorts of questions are so unproductive BackOnly and have been done to death.

What they're really asking is 'do you value a human's life over an animal's?'. And they're always asked to vegetarians/animal rights people in a goady way because the questioner wants to get the person to admit to something shocking.

SleepyFish · 01/11/2013 17:04

strumperton I'm studying veterinary science, one of my current modules is ethics in medicine. A lot of it is based in human medicine. Singer was the philosopher to bring ethics in the treatment of animals to the fore to the point that many laws were passed as a result of his book Animal Liberation: A new ethics for our treatment of animals, published in 1975. It's very interesting reading.

Rinoachicken · 01/11/2013 17:06

LeBFG I posted earlier about the why this thread was posted, it wasn't aimed at anyone, to goad or otherwise, but as a response to positions being taken on a different thread.

Strumpetron · 01/11/2013 17:08

sleepy ah thankyou for that. I'm currently studying health so I have to cover psychology, sociology, biology etc. I'll have to do some reading on that, sounds very interesting. Thankyou

OutragedFromLeeds · 01/11/2013 17:09

I love the random question threads. It's nice to have a 'discussion' where the outcome really doesn't matter because the chances of any us being in this situation is very, very small.

It's a change from the parking spaces/prams on buses/softplay threads.

SharpLily · 01/11/2013 17:09

"Although I do wonder if the fear of reprisals (or actual pressure at the time to do so) would make me save the stranger instead, although I'd never forgive myself for leaving my cats to suffer."

I think this is where a lot of the logic, including Singer's, goes out of the window. In my experience, at times of crisis people work on autopilot, they don't think through concepts such as 'will society condemn me for saving my dog over a stranger' - there simply isn't time apart from anything else. Instinct takes over, and I believe my instinct would make me go for my dog.

However, and this is another important point: we can't know if our hypothetical stranger is a rapist, murderer etc. or an exemplary human being, but equally our hypothetical rescuer cannot know in advance that they only have the chance to rescue one of their two options. I would go for my dog fully intending to go back in afterwards for the stranger. We know that won't be possible, but at the time of the hypothetical event, the characters don't know that.

I have no interest in trying to justify my instinct, it is my prerogative to choose my dog, but I know part of my reason is the lack of free will. As someone else pointed out earlier, he didn't choose me, I took responsibility for him. He'd been abused and I promised him he'd never again have to feel hunger, fear, pain, insecurity etc. and that I would always look after him. It was the most solemn promise of my life and I'm proud to say I've done it.

There would be a physical pull between he and me in that fire - he feels fear, pain, jealousy, love. He sulks when he doesn't get his own way, he looks to me to fix it when he is in pain. Who is to say he's less deserving than a human being? I cannot quantify the love and devotion he's given me - and he's been doing it longer than my husband and more consistently than any other human being I've ever known. He's never hurt me or made me doubt myself, or any of the other things even decent human beings do to each other.

Furthermore I always feel humans are more capable of understanding a situation - if my dog is in that building, it's because I put him there. That's not likely to be the case with the human, therefore he/she is not where my responsibility lies. The idea of him being stuck in that fire, not understanding what's happening and wondering why I haven't come to him makes me physically clench up. I couldn't leave him. We've been through a lot and I owe him as much as he owes me. Just a dog? No way.

Sorry, that was really long!

SharpLily · 01/11/2013 17:10

So, pianodoodle, does that make me a poor excuse for a human being?

BackOnlyBriefly · 01/11/2013 17:11

LeBFG, not unproductive really. I've found it quite enlightening. I always knew some people thought that way but am amazed it's so many.

Am wondering now about things like opinion polls and voting. When faced with "Do you want to be part of the EU". Will people be thinking "hmm well suppose if we leave the EU and I win the lottery and have a fabulous lifestyle that would be better than staying in and getting run over by a bus next thursday"

Strumpetron · 01/11/2013 17:12

I love the random question threads. It's nice to have a 'discussion' where the outcome really doesn't matter because the chances of any us being in this situation is very, very small
I usually like them too, except when people turn to personal insults if another person's answer isn't to their liking

BackOnlyBriefly · 01/11/2013 17:13

our hypothetical rescuer cannot know in advance that they only have the chance to rescue one of their two options.

See what I mean?

pianodoodle · 01/11/2013 17:14

sharplily

If you're one of the people who would save their pet over another person then yes, IMO.

Greydog · 01/11/2013 17:15

I'm with Spikey Humans have been hateful to me, but my dog is always there - so, dog over random human every time!

Strumpetron · 01/11/2013 17:16

Notice how it's only the people who would chose a human who have resorted to insults.

Greydog · 01/11/2013 17:17

Sharplily that was a great post. I'm glad I'm a poor excuse for a human being!

StickEmUpSkyward · 01/11/2013 17:17

I've come across this question before. I think its used in philosophy classes.

A human stranger or your own pet.
What a conundrum Hmm

BackOnlyBriefly · 01/11/2013 17:23

Well I can think of lots of answers to questions which would cause outrage. Of course the people who think it is acceptable behaviour would be surprised at the outrage.

OneStepCloser · 01/11/2013 17:23

tbh I prefer animals to humans in general, Id save a human but whilst carrying my dog on my back, cos I reckon I could carry them both.

OutragedFromLeeds · 01/11/2013 17:25

Back this is a thread discussing a hypothetical scenario. It's fine for people to add other hypothetical information/ideas/scenarios into that. I'm not sure why you're fine with the original OP, but seem to annoyed or mocking to anyone who wants to add a 'but' or 'what if' into it?

Is it because you think it should be human first in EVERY situation and so it doesn't matter what the actual circumstances are?

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.