PETA documentary last night

[entertainme]

And if it were an unknown child or your dog?

If it were a mother with her child in a basket on the bank?

I think it's easy to say your dog because the other option has no personal traits in this example.

In reality, the moment you look that person in the eye and they are a unique individual, the entire scenario changes dramatically.

[Mat Sklansky]

I don't know. Hopefully I never will.

[katyseagull]

[ QUOTE ]


I don't believe that the documentary would have been made and shown on HBO without that type of controversy. I also don't believe that those offended by these types of comparisons would have been swayed in the direction of PETA had she taken a gentler direction. Tactically, therefore, it was the right move on her part, no?

[/ QUOTE ]


I didn't watch the documentary but I'm pretty sure I would be swayed more in the if she would take a gentler approach. The thing about these animal rights nuts is their attitude and speech is so condescending and offensive. It turns a lot of us off. Isn't that the opposite of what they want? I guess I just don't get the PETA mentality. Maybe it's because I don't feel passionate about anything so it's hard to relate.




[ QUOTE ]
Actually, this is why I do respect PETA and all of the people/ groups (whackos and not) who are out there trying to "tackle" societal issues related to the enviroment, poverty, war, homelessness, etc.

I'm basically a loser in this regard.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think this is an important point. We probably do need people like this woman who feel passionate about a cause and who make it their mission to bring horrifying conditions to our attention. I mean how else will laws be changed?


The other day I was looking at chicken in the grocery store and I couldn't decide which brand to buy, Amish or Tyson. I actually stood there and thought about the way chickens are raised, the awful conditions they live in before they are killed. I wanted to make an informed decision but I didn't have any info. It made me feel kind of sick thinking about it to tell you the truth. Damn these shows! They make me feel sorry for chickens. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[batair]

I think PETA does more harm then good by pulling these kind of moves.All it does is give ammunition to label all environmentalist as wackos and nutjobs.It sets back environmental causes that i believe are far more important then if i have a pair of leather shoes or eat a bugger.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
So, what did you think of the movie?

[/ QUOTE ]

I loved it; perhaps had some problems with the ending. Commerce friend didn't like it so much. Much darker than Fargo done on the southern border.

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
It is silly to pose the question where the choice involves a random human and your own pet. Every day, almost every pet owner, basically makes that choice-in favor of the pet, since he knows he could sell it to a laboratory and use the money to save a third world country starving child.

[/ QUOTE ]

Andy Fox's friend Dennis Prager has often asked and posted the exact question I asked Matt.. **

Your counter-example isn't realistic or analogous. There's no shortage of animals passed over as pets available for research. So a laboratory wouldn't fork over significant money to buy your pet; it would be far easier to raise money in another way if you wanted to use it to save a child in Africa (or anywhere).


[ QUOTE ]
Of course if the scenario was such that he had to look the human in the eye, many pet owners might reluctantly save that human. But it wouldn't be because they thought it was the moral choice. It would be simply out of selfishness. They would be afraid that choosing the animal might haunt them down the road.

[/ QUOTE ]

If they had a religious upbringing (regardless of their current level of faith) they would likely save the human because religion generally makes it clear that human life is more sacred.


[ QUOTE ]
Here is a better question. If you could save either Koko or an elderly, moderately retarded, institutionalized individual, who would you choose?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's another question, not a better question. I'd save Koko given I now know that he or she is a world class gorilla and the elderly retarded person doesn't have much time or quality of life left.

But in my original question it's the pet you love versus an unknown human. The human could be a young Hitler, Barry Greenstein about to go on a tournament hot streak, a stumbling every day guy like me, or someone random.


~ Rick


PS ** As an aside I was hoping the question would also be raised in this email debate with Sam Harris but alas it wasn't. I do think Sam Harris (a very moral non-believer) is quite convincing and wonder what choice he would make had Dennis asked the question.

PPS Not sure it was discussed in Dennis's YouTube discussion with Christopher Hitchens. I'll try to listen tomorrow.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I wasn't around for the Abdul wars, but I have been told it was his abusive nature, not his vocabulary, which got him banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's my understanding too although he did write a very good
poker/penis related essay.

So I was pulling your leg a bit. Please accept my apologizes. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

~Rick

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course if the scenario was such that he had to look the human in the eye, many pet owners might reluctantly save that human. But it wouldn't be because they thought it was the moral choice. It would be simply out of selfishness. They would be afraid that choosing the animal might haunt them down the road.


[/ QUOTE ]

Although it's fun and interesting to speculate on these things, you haven't the slightest ground to say what anyone's motivations would be when choosing to save the human. To say the least, your own interpretation is a highly flavored one.

Further, it strikes me as unlikely. YMMV. In a situation in which one is thrust so shockingly into a full grasp of the present as when a human life is on the line, I think one of the last things to come up might be whether one will be haunted by anything in the future, and I'd guess it would be among the least determinative. It would be very hard for that thought to gain position over the immediate impact of someone possibly losing their life right NOW.

Actually I think even among the admittedly selfish or indifferent among us, it would be pretty hard to overcome natural human empathy -- and it would come to you hard and in a flash even if you hadn't felt that way for years. Many people who have rescued others on the spur of the moment have said they really didn't think about it or that they just did what anyone would do. I'd be surprised if that was very far-fetched.

Either way, I don't think anyone knows what they would do in such situations until they happen. But I think your speculation here isn't particularly good and shouldn't be passed off as certainty.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
And if it were an unknown child or your dog?

If it were a mother with her child in a basket on the bank?

I think it's easy to say your dog because the other option has no personal traits in this example.

In reality, the moment you look that person in the eye and they are a unique individual, the entire scenario changes dramatically.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Talk is cheap. Looking someone in the eye and deciding to let them die would be a very big deal for most of us.

Heck, in war it's even hard to get soldiers to shoot people trying to kill them, for quite a while. Killing people is a big leap.

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This issue can't be too controversial for the lounge, can it?

I'm disappointed. Wouln't we all kill countless random humans for the safety of our dogs or houses or cars?

[/ QUOTE ]

The pet you love and a unknown stranger have just fallen off a bluff into the ocean and you only have time to save one of them.

Do you save your pet or the stranger?

~ Rick

PS I'm guessing this has been done before, perhaps on your Dad's SMP forum, but I just had to ask anyway.

Edit to add I realize I may be questioning something said very much tongue in cheek.



[/ QUOTE ]

I love my dog but would rescue the unknown human without a second thought. I mean, it's literally not even questionable, IMO.

I am all for treating all animals as humanely as possible, but they are NOT equal in my mind to humans.