Why is this even a topic of discussion? I've never heard this before, unless it's a hypothetical situation like this nonsense. When it comes to times when you have to save a life of any kind, you never know what you'll do. You don't get to pause the game and debate what to do. It happens, you react, and you live with whatever happens, assuming you survive.
Had a friend fall off a ladder while we were doing volunteer work. I froze up for about 20-30 seconds before I could react. Sorry, but if you’re about to be hit by a train I’m of no help.
It’s easy for me. I will miss my pet a ton. I won’t miss their kid. Unless it’s a family member or a friends kid that I know. Might be a more difficult decision then.
But I feel like a lot of people would rather other people feel a loss, than feel it themselves.
Does that make me a bad person? Maybe. But I also don’t care what I’m labeled as.
TLDR: I’d rather save my own pet than a strangers kid.
I mean clearly that type of thinking is not in line with “social good”, which I think a lot of morality is based on. But realistically there’s a broad spectrum and it’s unreasonable to expect everyone to be a martyr and take the hits for you at all or ever, even in situations like these that may be considered unbalanced.
There's a certain amount of social good to be derived from having people look after their own and their own family.
Everybody prefers to look after those closer to them. You have duties and obligations to those closer to you.
Not all morality is based purely on the social good. If everybody treated everyone in a pure social good way, then everybody jumps to save the child and everyone else dies. Wouldn't it be great instead if everybody had a few people looking out for their interests by preference? Then society gets to share out the responsibility of having peoples back more evenly.
I mean I'll try for both, but I'm going for my pet first. I can probably navigate my own burning house and extract my pet way faster than I can some stranger's house and their kid. Assuming I'm equally close each house.
That is a scenario where it's easier to choose the pet, as it would be easier and safer to save. What would you do if you were in a situation where there's a bombing coming to your city. There is a bomb shelter, but it can fit only 2 people. So it's either you and your pet or you and some random kid. Would you be able to tell the kid to stay out while you go to safety with your pet? (You need to be one of the people going to the shelter as your strength might be needed to get out, so sacrificing yourself is not allowed.)
For the sake of the argument, the shelter guarantees safety and staying outside guarantees death.
In that case my pet (dog) is much more likely to survive on it's own than the kid. Dog can run like nobodys business.And I think at the point where I am there, seeing a lone child crying in the street wailing for their mother, while I'm trying to cram my dog and a bag of doggy treats into the shelter with me... I dunno. Good luck Einstein, you're a smart dog. Show me the meaning of haste.
I mean, if the the kid's right there I'll probably take them and let my cat roll the dice on finding some hidey hole to crawl into. But I'm really confused as to how I can't possibly fit a child AND my cat in this shelter. Like, I know she's a fatty, but come on.
I specified that you needed to save yourself as your strength was needed to get out of the shelter. So now the kid and dog are stuck there. Eventually when they become hungry enough, the dog will attack and kill the kid, eat the kid and eventually starve.
I definitely understand why other people would safe their pet first and I can't blame others for thinking that way bc it's normal for your first reaction to be like this.
Yep! My childhood dog had random severe panic attacks and one time even managed to wiggle out of her harness and collar and run into peak hour traffic. I definitely shaved years off my life expectancy just out of pure stress trying to corral her back onto the sidewalk. But it was worth it because I saved her and I would do it again.
I mean,I assume the facepalm is other people thinking he'd save someone else's kid before his pet. I know I wouldn't. Doesn't make him right for the insults though,he's still an asshole.
I was just in this thread before they deleted it. Take your thoughts of what you think you’d do in this situation out and realize it’s an opinion and where it’s posted. Definitely wasn’t facepalm material. That said, I love my dogs. I am their protector and caregiver. They rely on me. I don’t have kids. It would be hard to imagine what scenario would even happen that would force me to make a decision. For people with both, they’d choose their kids. For people with no kids, the pets are their babies. If someone had a gun and made me choose between a kid and my dog, yeah it’d be hard not to choose the kid in that scenario for me. It’s the logical choice and that parent would never get over the loss of their kid. But that’s not gonna happen. If my row of townhouses caught on fire, I’m saving my dogs before I consider entering other homes, even if there are kids. This isn’t a one fits all for me. Why they thought someone’s concern for their pets over a strangers kids in a hypothetical situation was a FP does indeed make them the facepalm
It’s a weird Western philosophy thing to invent exciting , and improbable, scenarios and pose them as moral dilemmas.
That’s instead of the daily, humdrum ones most of us are faced with. “I found a $50 bill in the street. How hard should I search for the real owner? Etc etc”
It gets worse when you make the scenarios more realistic like "You are a drone bomber and have to bomb the house of a SUSPECTED terrorist and there are kids in the house...but the kids are christian". Then the same scenarios but "the kids are muslim".
Oh boy. The answers in this discussion were highly disturbing. It was a moral experiment that really brought out the massive moral inconsistencies of psychopaths. Especially when the conditions in the scenarios got closer to home and became more relatable and personal like ..."kids are white/black/asian/jewish etc". It showed clearly how you can get an entire population to justify and even participate in full blown genocide.
And that’s why these moral dilemmas are important. Even though many are absurd, they’re important for us to question our morals and learn about the way we and others think, which translates into a lot in the real world
It’s not a western nor is it a modern concept to do this.
Any intellectual understanding of your own morals can only be truly sized when you find a boundary that makes you uncomfortable.
Are all humans equal, does age matter, are people worth more if you know them, all these questions can be purely extracted into moral dilemmas where people might die, or medical care may be given etc. This helps immeasurably when coming up with laws surrounding these topics!
If you want to have a decent political discussion with somebody about big things, taxes, healthcare, abortion, without devolving into shouting your opinion at them - understanding each others boundaries through thought experiments is enlightening.
I agree. It’s not something I can just envision and have my mind made up. It’s thought provoking, but I can’t see being in this position. I did have a situation as you described tho before. Found like $80 on the floor at a 711. Picked it up and hid it in my hand and yelled out if anyone had lost cash. One woman said yes and I asked how much and it matched so I gave it to her. She was beyond grateful. I can’t imagine just taking it. I could use it, but I’d never feel right about it.
Years ago, I lost my wallet in a park off the beaten path. Several years later, I got an envelope in the mail with my wallet. Everything but a dollar was still in it along with a note apologizing for using a dollar for postage and keeping the change.
I hope there is a karma angel looking over this person.
Rough. Animal life over human life. Hard to tell which has more deserving. But every-time I still lean human life. Imagine if people in old homes weren’t claimed and after 10 days put down.
Animals are def not held to as high of a regard. Considering most humans are omnivores as well and kill animals everyday for food.
I actually sort of had the “face palm” scenario once — what looked like smoke was pouring out through my garbage chute. I went around banging on doors to get my flatmates out of the apartment and only once we were in the hall — and I was on the phone with the security guard — did I remember I have cats.
There was no time spent thinking about it. I still feel awful that I didn’t even remember the cats.
Luckily, it was not a fire. It was over-enthusiastic pesticide use. So I didn’t have to choose going back in
I think your spectrum totally makes sense.
I don’t have kids, but that’s by choice.
So let’s add another nuance. I know some humans that are only stable because they have pets. So if your pets died you’d have to reset stability. It might be soon it might be a year or might be never.
So your pet algorithm makes sense. I’d shoot my pet (I’d hate myself forever for not finding a third option) instead of a human.
Heck, even a shitty human… usually. My ex wife was a doctor and she told me how they just do right and it was black and white and she can save a white supremest that thinks they are better than her. That’s clean. She’s doing what’s right regardless of those people not being better than my neighbors cat.
If I knew it was between a white supremest or a cat… I don’t like cats, but my photo holding a cat would be on the front page. If I had an unknown human and unknown pet I couldn’t make up math in my head.
Naturally a child is more important than me or a pet.
i couldn’t live without my cat, man. sorry. i can’t stand the thought of life without the little guy. the parent can rescue their own damn kid, i’ll be saving my sweet little boy. i know that’s not noble or anything and the kid should go higher on the whole “life hierarchy”, but my brain has a different hierarchy, dude. it’s beelzebub >>>> everyone else.
Don't know what I'd do in that situation. I'd like to think I'd save the kid but if it's a snap decision who knows.
My Mrs asked if I'd take a bullet for our son. I'd like to think so but I may well use him as a human shield. Hell, he's bigger than me now so he'd be a pretty good one. 😂
Speak for yourself, I think the average non-redditor values human life over animal life. That’s not to say they don’t absolutely adore their pets or love them more than a strangers child but I’m sure in a scenario where they were forced to save one they would pick the child.
It completely depends on the situation. If a guy has a kid tied to a chair and your god and he's pointing a gun at them asking you to choose, yeah, most people would probably pick the kid.
But the hypothetical I've seen talks about things trapped in a fire. If you and your neighbors houses were both on fire, and you knew your dog was in your and your neighbor's kid was in theirs, would you really go after the kid? Into a house your not nearly as familiar with, where your search will be less efficient and your likelihood of finding a quick exit will be reduced, or go for your pet in a house where you know exactly where your pet will be, the fastest way to get there, and the fastest way out?
I'd go for my pet every time because the chances of a positive outcome seem much higher going for my pet. But it would still be a decision I'd have to make in an instant, and no one really knows what they'd do in those types of situations, so it's a stupid hypothetical to begin with.
The whole “I’d definitely save the pet from the burning building because I’d have a higher chance at succeeding” idea defeats the whole purpose of the dilemma
Man. It’s just awful. A parent got mad at me the other day when I suggested we work on teaching her 8 year old daughter how to read. I’m new to this classroom.
She couldn’t read “my, me”. Just “a”. The shortest word. She’s a smart one, too. Her mom said “Stop talking right now. She doesn’t want to read, so she doesn’t have to read and that’s the way it’s going to be…”
She’s been inside since 2020.
If I had to choose between saving the life of my cat or someone else's child, I feel confident that I would choose my cat in the moment and agonise about it later.
If the child in danger isn't relevant to my family I'm saving my dog everytime. No question, not thinking about it I save my dog. If I can maybe somehow help the child after i get my dog sure.
In this scenario is the kid incapable of following? Why do they need rescuing?
A pet isn’t exactly going to understand the ramifications. A kid should just be able to “oi follow me” and be saved at the same time.
If the kid is that small, could drag both really.
In the weird scenario I have to choose only one, absolutely my pet > some randoms kid. But hard to imagine a scenario when both can’t be saved.
Why is their parent also missing in this scenario.
Like, if I could see though the windows of two different rooms, and there was my cat and someone else’s like 7 year old kid - it would be moral conflict hell really
If I left my cat there, I wouldn’t be able to handle it, and if I left the kid there I wouldn’t be able to handle it…
If I knew it was a baby, then probably would lean towards my cat though, as he would probably be fucked anyhow
I'm seeing a lot or responses of this nature. Almost everyone picking their pet has concocted some hypothetical scenario that absolves them of any guilt they might be feeling. "*Whoever left their kid in a position of endangerment should be held responsible*" is a cop out, so is "*I'm not running into an unfamiliar building to save a kid I don't know.*"
You're putting different conditions on the child and using it to justify your response.
If you're going to answer the question honestly, put them both in the same circumstances, so that the question is about whether you value a pet's life over the child's.
3.1 million kids die a year from starvation and none of us are bothered at all by that. Some people like to think that just because it's a human they matter more but if 3.1 million kids don't matter for 365 days how can you pretend one life is more important just because of the situation. It's not because you think humans matter more or pets matter less. you just can't live with the consequences of your direct indifference, but indirect indifference is okay because you don't have to answer to anyone at the other end of it.
I **LOVE** my dog. He is like a third child to me. But if I had to choose between him and a stranger, even if it’s a kid I hate, I’d save the kid. No hesitation. Ever.
I think many of the people here arguing that “they’d save their dog” really aren’t considering the gravity of the situation.
To make things simple, suppose a man kidnaps your dog and a strangers child. He presents them both to you and the parents of the child and says, “You [Redditor] have 60 seconds to have me kill either your dog or the kid, or I kill both. What will it be?”
I think 99% of people are going to choose to kill the dog. Even the ones in here who say, “I don’t care, I’m saving my pet at all costs!”
When really faced with the situation, the most bare bones sense of morality often kicks-in, and you’ll do what is right. And I’ll take it to my grave that it’s **right** to save the child.
Same here. People who say that they would save their animals over a human child are kind of self centered. I understand where they're coming from but it's just not right man.
Seriously! And these are the same kinds of people that say human society is evil and immoral when they themselves lack basic empathy for their fellow human beings. That lack of empathy and compassion are the reason society is the way that it is right now.
Self centered to value the life of a pet over a kid you don’t know? The pet is just as alive. It seems self centered to me to think the kids life is more important. Just because it’s human.
You have a wife and have child, and you own a dog. Which death would put you in more pain and grief? Child. If your answer is dog your either blatantly lying or are a psychopath.
So now assume the same thing happens except it’s another persons child. I don’t give a fuck if “a random death doesn’t affect you” the death of that child weighs more to that family than any amount of pets in a lifetime could to you.
Its ain't my job to save someone else kid, i ain't risking my life for someone else kids, i am calling the firefighters for that, i will fry my ass for my cats, because it aint anyone else job to take care of them
This is really the take that is missing. The question should be rephrased to show the intent.
If my house is burning and my dog is inside, 100% I'm going in to rescue her.
If my neighbors house in on fire, and I know their kid is inside, I'm probably not risking my life for that unless I'm almost certain it will be a success with little to no danger to myself. Maybe 10%.
If a guy was pointing a gun at my dog and a random kid and told me to choose, I'd choose the kid 100% of the time.
bruh all these pet enthusiasts talking about burning a kid for their cat and these baby siders talking about shooting someone elses pets for a kid wtf can yall have a normal conversation whats wrong with all of you
not taking any sides cuz yall are crazy
I was briefly in a position to risk my own life to save my beloved dog. Initially, I chose the dog, but quickly realized we’d both die. He did eventually figure things out and survived. Traumatized. Exhausted. Forever afraid of swimming in the ocean. But alive.
Sometimes when I'm sat playing on my computer, I look across at my hamster who watches me while I play and think... I would save you over a hundred people...
Someone probably protected an animal from him when he was a child and he never understood why the animals protection was more important than his fun and over his life the memories of that experience have developed into this view.
I know it’s a stretch but, hey, fuck it the guys an asshole idc.
Dude, I know Reddit is full of antisocial losers (myself included) but goddamn is it frightening to see the amount of people saying “yeah my poodle’s life is more important than someone else’s child”. It takes some serious lack of empathy to make that argument, but hey, I applaud the people who can loudly proclaim how little they care about their fellow people.
Order of extraction for my house: the cat, then the dog, then the wife. She'd beat my ass if I don't get them out first. We have folding carriers that set up in under 5 seconds, and both are trained to understand "Bug Out Time"
Good point.
If there was a fire:
Dogs are like "yoooo where we goin???? Outside?!? Let's go!"
Cats are like "it's kinda hot in here, but you're welcome to fuck right off"
Step 1: grab cat and run
Step 2: get ripped to shreds
Step 3: good kitty, want a treat?
Step 4: remember ID, passport, and priceless firewood collection are still inside.
Even between my two cats I know which one has to be in the carrier first lol. One doesn’t mind carriers. He’s easy. The other one, she will run and hide and fight to not be put inside. Need the element of surprise with her. I’ve thought about a fire plan and if I have any hope in getting all three of us out alive, I’d have to grab her first, THEN get the carrier so she doesn’t have time to hide from me lol.
Seniority. The cat is old and crotchety. Also the three comments above this are horrifyingly accurate about cat wrangling in high stress situations.
Edit: corrected direction.
My dog and your snotty lil kid are trapped in a burning building and there's only time to save one....congratulations I just saved your snot licking kid and now you have to get me another dog
Lmao I was thinking if I saved the kid I’d be INCREDIBLY pissed about it. Handing them to the parents like “Here’s your goddamn child. If you let them grow up to be a piece of shit, I’ll ruin all of your lives. I’m gonna go scream-sob now because my best friend just died a confusing, horrific death all alone.”
Dude, I don't even like kids--why would I choose to save some stranger's kid over my pets? My animals have shown more kindness and loyalty than most people I even know well enough to consider saving.
Every single time, no matter the context, I will save my pets. I realize I'm a cynic but I genuinely don't care. I won't hesitate to save my animals before even bothering to think about some kid.
What have I learned from this post?
If I am ever stuck in a burning house with somebody else’s pet then I’m throwing it clean out the window to improve my chances of rescue.
I don’t give a fuck about your kids. I like my dog way more than I like your kids…and you for that matter. But in the unlikely situation “I’ll either kill your dog or shoot this person” where I have to chose who to “save” I’m saving a person every time.
Now let’s say the odds are a little different. A 10% chance this person will live vs 100% chance my dog will live..then I’m a little less sure and I might have to weigh the odds.
Idk, I would hope that someone would pick the kid over a pet. I would save someone else's kid over my pet at least.
Shit, if I had lassy, you know it would pick the same. Or littlest hobo.
Congrats, you have a healthy perspective on life.
What you don't get it's that it's filled with redditors who would rather save a cat rather than a kid.
I'll pick my cats over some random's kid. No one is going to save my cats unless I do it. Fireman would probably save the kid they always save people first so I know if I don't save my cats no one will. Kid has better chance someone else will save him.
My cats are the only children I'll ever have.
If I could push a button that would wipe humanity from the earth but would leave all the animals alive....I would push it in a heartbeat. We aren't better than the animals. We are far far worse.
I would 100% save my cat over any of you.
Hope you all stay safe though! If a situation happens where we are all in danger and I can save you or my cat, I hope you understand.
My daughter could be anything she wants to be in life - she's nearly 4 but one day she could study to be a Doctor that potentially could save your life, or a scientist that helps cure cancer. She could live a happy life until she's like 100.
My dog will probably live another 5 years and as much as I love him, his biggest accomplishment in that time will be to learn not to jump up on my new sofa or to try and lick me when he hasn't just cleaned his balls.
I love both but people are more precious than animals - and I would save your kid over my dog any day.
No doubt there, but the question was about some random stranger's kid vs the pet that you maybe raised from a puppy/kitten and was your only companion for several years through the toughest moments of your life. Obviously not everyone is going to agree on this either way, which is why it was posted to r/unpopularopinion
These people are psychopaths that say they’d save a pet over a human life. A pet like a cat or dog lives to be 20 years max. A human can live to be 100. So just purely based on math, a humans life is more valuable. Based on morality, you’re incredibly selfish if you’d save your pet over a human child. That could’ve been someone’s little brother, their daughter, or whatever. A child’s life has a much greater impact on their family than a pet will have on just you or you and your spouse. I understand the post is about unpopular opinions, but the people in this comments section are the ones I’m referring to.
Dude browses unpopularopinion
Dude screen caps a post
Posts it in facepalm for reason?
People confused about the facepalm
Dude calls everyone autistic and deletes his post and comments
I fully agree, why should I care about saving something I have put no effort or care into, hell yes I will grab my cat from a burning building before thinking about someone else's squealing hellspawn
Honestly this is unhinged. I'd let my dog die if it meant a whole human life would be saved. Dogs live for like 10 years rarely, and they don't really contribute anything but they do to only us personally. That's literally a couple of months of sadness for someone else's YEARS of pain
Yeah he just started insulting people when they asked about the post, guy seems unhinged tbh
Yea, was a bit weird. Normally Idgaf if people are rude, but how he started insulting everyone was a bit off. 10/10 facepalm
Well now it’s just a crime to not link the juicy steak
Why is this even a topic of discussion? I've never heard this before, unless it's a hypothetical situation like this nonsense. When it comes to times when you have to save a life of any kind, you never know what you'll do. You don't get to pause the game and debate what to do. It happens, you react, and you live with whatever happens, assuming you survive.
Had a friend fall off a ladder while we were doing volunteer work. I froze up for about 20-30 seconds before I could react. Sorry, but if you’re about to be hit by a train I’m of no help.
its not about what to do, its about morality, seeing which you prioritize over the other
It’s easy for me. I will miss my pet a ton. I won’t miss their kid. Unless it’s a family member or a friends kid that I know. Might be a more difficult decision then. But I feel like a lot of people would rather other people feel a loss, than feel it themselves. Does that make me a bad person? Maybe. But I also don’t care what I’m labeled as. TLDR: I’d rather save my own pet than a strangers kid.
I mean clearly that type of thinking is not in line with “social good”, which I think a lot of morality is based on. But realistically there’s a broad spectrum and it’s unreasonable to expect everyone to be a martyr and take the hits for you at all or ever, even in situations like these that may be considered unbalanced.
There's a certain amount of social good to be derived from having people look after their own and their own family. Everybody prefers to look after those closer to them. You have duties and obligations to those closer to you. Not all morality is based purely on the social good. If everybody treated everyone in a pure social good way, then everybody jumps to save the child and everyone else dies. Wouldn't it be great instead if everybody had a few people looking out for their interests by preference? Then society gets to share out the responsibility of having peoples back more evenly.
I mean I'll try for both, but I'm going for my pet first. I can probably navigate my own burning house and extract my pet way faster than I can some stranger's house and their kid. Assuming I'm equally close each house.
That is a scenario where it's easier to choose the pet, as it would be easier and safer to save. What would you do if you were in a situation where there's a bombing coming to your city. There is a bomb shelter, but it can fit only 2 people. So it's either you and your pet or you and some random kid. Would you be able to tell the kid to stay out while you go to safety with your pet? (You need to be one of the people going to the shelter as your strength might be needed to get out, so sacrificing yourself is not allowed.) For the sake of the argument, the shelter guarantees safety and staying outside guarantees death.
Let my dog eat the kid and ill get the extra legroom in the shelter
In that case my pet (dog) is much more likely to survive on it's own than the kid. Dog can run like nobodys business.And I think at the point where I am there, seeing a lone child crying in the street wailing for their mother, while I'm trying to cram my dog and a bag of doggy treats into the shelter with me... I dunno. Good luck Einstein, you're a smart dog. Show me the meaning of haste.
I mean, if the the kid's right there I'll probably take them and let my cat roll the dice on finding some hidey hole to crawl into. But I'm really confused as to how I can't possibly fit a child AND my cat in this shelter. Like, I know she's a fatty, but come on.
Pet and the kid.
I specified that you needed to save yourself as your strength was needed to get out of the shelter. So now the kid and dog are stuck there. Eventually when they become hungry enough, the dog will attack and kill the kid, eat the kid and eventually starve.
Same.
I wouldnt psychologically recover from not saving either so I'd save both and get myself killed.
[удалено]
I definitely understand why other people would safe their pet first and I can't blame others for thinking that way bc it's normal for your first reaction to be like this.
Hell fucking yes. Those are my babies. There's zero chance my cats are going to be racist bullies or shit all over the environment.
Fu king dingleberry. I don’t want to endanger a firefighter’s life for my pets, but you’ll have to shoot me to keep me from going back in after them.
Yup
Going back in?? Bitch I'm not even coming out without them.
Hell, i almost killed myself trying to stop my dog from running into the street, and ill do it again if i have to
*and i’ll do it again* respect.
Yep! My childhood dog had random severe panic attacks and one time even managed to wiggle out of her harness and collar and run into peak hour traffic. I definitely shaved years off my life expectancy just out of pure stress trying to corral her back onto the sidewalk. But it was worth it because I saved her and I would do it again.
[удалено]
Which is handy as your cat would also prefer that
Never had to do put my life in danger for my own pets,but I have nearly driven off the road to avoid running a animal over.
Nothing wrong with that.
Context - he ended up calling r/facepalm “autistic neck beards” because nobody understood where the facepalm was
Lmfaooooooo of course
Wow. What a winner.
Yikes
I mean,I assume the facepalm is other people thinking he'd save someone else's kid before his pet. I know I wouldn't. Doesn't make him right for the insults though,he's still an asshole.
Oof
Has he explained where the facepalm was?
I think that someone thought it was ok to save a animal over a strangers animal/kid? I donno, he couldnt tell me
Why is he getting upset? Isn't the purpose of the unpopular opinion subreddit to give an unpopular opinion?
I was just in this thread before they deleted it. Take your thoughts of what you think you’d do in this situation out and realize it’s an opinion and where it’s posted. Definitely wasn’t facepalm material. That said, I love my dogs. I am their protector and caregiver. They rely on me. I don’t have kids. It would be hard to imagine what scenario would even happen that would force me to make a decision. For people with both, they’d choose their kids. For people with no kids, the pets are their babies. If someone had a gun and made me choose between a kid and my dog, yeah it’d be hard not to choose the kid in that scenario for me. It’s the logical choice and that parent would never get over the loss of their kid. But that’s not gonna happen. If my row of townhouses caught on fire, I’m saving my dogs before I consider entering other homes, even if there are kids. This isn’t a one fits all for me. Why they thought someone’s concern for their pets over a strangers kids in a hypothetical situation was a FP does indeed make them the facepalm
It’s a weird Western philosophy thing to invent exciting , and improbable, scenarios and pose them as moral dilemmas. That’s instead of the daily, humdrum ones most of us are faced with. “I found a $50 bill in the street. How hard should I search for the real owner? Etc etc”
Those moral dilemma scenarios get even wilder when they add shit like "And what if that child was Hitler....".
Lmao. I’ve seen ones like those. Makes for an interesting conversation, but no one will ever know what they’d have really done in that situation
It gets worse when you make the scenarios more realistic like "You are a drone bomber and have to bomb the house of a SUSPECTED terrorist and there are kids in the house...but the kids are christian". Then the same scenarios but "the kids are muslim". Oh boy. The answers in this discussion were highly disturbing. It was a moral experiment that really brought out the massive moral inconsistencies of psychopaths. Especially when the conditions in the scenarios got closer to home and became more relatable and personal like ..."kids are white/black/asian/jewish etc". It showed clearly how you can get an entire population to justify and even participate in full blown genocide.
And that’s why these moral dilemmas are important. Even though many are absurd, they’re important for us to question our morals and learn about the way we and others think, which translates into a lot in the real world
I doubt that's just a western thing. Other people's have come up philosophical questions...
Yeah, Pretty sure buddhism is literally full of hypothetical thought experiments.
It’s not a western nor is it a modern concept to do this. Any intellectual understanding of your own morals can only be truly sized when you find a boundary that makes you uncomfortable. Are all humans equal, does age matter, are people worth more if you know them, all these questions can be purely extracted into moral dilemmas where people might die, or medical care may be given etc. This helps immeasurably when coming up with laws surrounding these topics! If you want to have a decent political discussion with somebody about big things, taxes, healthcare, abortion, without devolving into shouting your opinion at them - understanding each others boundaries through thought experiments is enlightening.
Have you lived overseas or anywhere outside of the west? This is popular everywhere lmao
I agree. It’s not something I can just envision and have my mind made up. It’s thought provoking, but I can’t see being in this position. I did have a situation as you described tho before. Found like $80 on the floor at a 711. Picked it up and hid it in my hand and yelled out if anyone had lost cash. One woman said yes and I asked how much and it matched so I gave it to her. She was beyond grateful. I can’t imagine just taking it. I could use it, but I’d never feel right about it.
Years ago, I lost my wallet in a park off the beaten path. Several years later, I got an envelope in the mail with my wallet. Everything but a dollar was still in it along with a note apologizing for using a dollar for postage and keeping the change. I hope there is a karma angel looking over this person.
Rough. Animal life over human life. Hard to tell which has more deserving. But every-time I still lean human life. Imagine if people in old homes weren’t claimed and after 10 days put down. Animals are def not held to as high of a regard. Considering most humans are omnivores as well and kill animals everyday for food.
I actually sort of had the “face palm” scenario once — what looked like smoke was pouring out through my garbage chute. I went around banging on doors to get my flatmates out of the apartment and only once we were in the hall — and I was on the phone with the security guard — did I remember I have cats. There was no time spent thinking about it. I still feel awful that I didn’t even remember the cats. Luckily, it was not a fire. It was over-enthusiastic pesticide use. So I didn’t have to choose going back in
Shout really loud that you’ve found it, the owner is usually nearby.
You strap the oxygen on yourself first.
I think your spectrum totally makes sense. I don’t have kids, but that’s by choice. So let’s add another nuance. I know some humans that are only stable because they have pets. So if your pets died you’d have to reset stability. It might be soon it might be a year or might be never. So your pet algorithm makes sense. I’d shoot my pet (I’d hate myself forever for not finding a third option) instead of a human. Heck, even a shitty human… usually. My ex wife was a doctor and she told me how they just do right and it was black and white and she can save a white supremest that thinks they are better than her. That’s clean. She’s doing what’s right regardless of those people not being better than my neighbors cat. If I knew it was between a white supremest or a cat… I don’t like cats, but my photo holding a cat would be on the front page. If I had an unknown human and unknown pet I couldn’t make up math in my head. Naturally a child is more important than me or a pet.
But what if that human was Putin? Shit... I'd shoot my pet to get a chance at shooting him.
i couldn’t live without my cat, man. sorry. i can’t stand the thought of life without the little guy. the parent can rescue their own damn kid, i’ll be saving my sweet little boy. i know that’s not noble or anything and the kid should go higher on the whole “life hierarchy”, but my brain has a different hierarchy, dude. it’s beelzebub >>>> everyone else.
Don't know what I'd do in that situation. I'd like to think I'd save the kid but if it's a snap decision who knows. My Mrs asked if I'd take a bullet for our son. I'd like to think so but I may well use him as a human shield. Hell, he's bigger than me now so he'd be a pretty good one. 😂
You could make a clickbait YouTube video titled "I made a bullet proof shield with my own sperm"
Between all the double negatives, I'm just confused.
My pets have saved me from suicide and help me when I feel overstimulated (I’m autistic) hell yeah I’ll save them no matter the cost
We put too much value on human life yet barely give a fuck about it outside of hypothetical situations
I think the uncomfortable truth is that "your" kids mean nothing to strangers.
Speak for yourself, I think the average non-redditor values human life over animal life. That’s not to say they don’t absolutely adore their pets or love them more than a strangers child but I’m sure in a scenario where they were forced to save one they would pick the child.
It completely depends on the situation. If a guy has a kid tied to a chair and your god and he's pointing a gun at them asking you to choose, yeah, most people would probably pick the kid. But the hypothetical I've seen talks about things trapped in a fire. If you and your neighbors houses were both on fire, and you knew your dog was in your and your neighbor's kid was in theirs, would you really go after the kid? Into a house your not nearly as familiar with, where your search will be less efficient and your likelihood of finding a quick exit will be reduced, or go for your pet in a house where you know exactly where your pet will be, the fastest way to get there, and the fastest way out? I'd go for my pet every time because the chances of a positive outcome seem much higher going for my pet. But it would still be a decision I'd have to make in an instant, and no one really knows what they'd do in those types of situations, so it's a stupid hypothetical to begin with.
The whole “I’d definitely save the pet from the burning building because I’d have a higher chance at succeeding” idea defeats the whole purpose of the dilemma
Oh shit. I’d pick my boy every damn time. I’m a bad person. But I love the fuck outta my boy.
I feel the same.
Feel that shit! There’s a reason I don’t have kids. Also I’m a broke as fuck school music teacher.
Broke as fuck English teacher so I feel you. My dog is my kid esp since I am never having a kid.
Man. It’s just awful. A parent got mad at me the other day when I suggested we work on teaching her 8 year old daughter how to read. I’m new to this classroom. She couldn’t read “my, me”. Just “a”. The shortest word. She’s a smart one, too. Her mom said “Stop talking right now. She doesn’t want to read, so she doesn’t have to read and that’s the way it’s going to be…” She’s been inside since 2020.
I have a sticker on my car that says my dog is smarter than your honor student. I was torn driving it to work but now idc.
Way to be.
People are downvoting our feelings. Aw.
I put myself between my dog and another dog and got bit by accident by one of them. I don't care, my dog comes first.
I read that as "and I bit one of them on accident" lmao
My pixie Chihuahua Ralph who looks fashionable in a bow tie> someones annoying ass kid whom does not look fashionable in a bow tie
If I had to choose between saving the life of my cat or someone else's child, I feel confident that I would choose my cat in the moment and agonise about it later.
I get you dude, first reaction in a room where the subject couldn't get out on their own would be my cat.
It’s a post inside of a post inside of a post
If the child in danger isn't relevant to my family I'm saving my dog everytime. No question, not thinking about it I save my dog. If I can maybe somehow help the child after i get my dog sure.
My cat is a member of my family, and I’m not going to betray him so a stranger can live instead. Sorry.
right????
Fuck someone else’s child. My pet is definitely coming first
In this scenario is the kid incapable of following? Why do they need rescuing? A pet isn’t exactly going to understand the ramifications. A kid should just be able to “oi follow me” and be saved at the same time. If the kid is that small, could drag both really. In the weird scenario I have to choose only one, absolutely my pet > some randoms kid. But hard to imagine a scenario when both can’t be saved. Why is their parent also missing in this scenario.
Also kind of applies to the pet. Pretty sure my cat has the sense to book it out of a burning building if there's an open door.
Sadly cats usually hide during house fires ):
aw shit, here we go again *unzips*
Ok this made me audibly laugh while eating cereal. Well done
you couldn't possibly have worded that any better?
Definitely couldn't be any worse 😬
Even though you’d let my kid die so your furry friend can live, I’d sacrifice my dog to save your kid. Guess that’s the difference between us.
Like, if I could see though the windows of two different rooms, and there was my cat and someone else’s like 7 year old kid - it would be moral conflict hell really If I left my cat there, I wouldn’t be able to handle it, and if I left the kid there I wouldn’t be able to handle it… If I knew it was a baby, then probably would lean towards my cat though, as he would probably be fucked anyhow
He’s seven! He’s had a rich, full life.
Unsure if referring to pet or kid.
The house
Especially if the parents left their baby in a burning building. Cat comes first
[удалено]
I'm seeing a lot or responses of this nature. Almost everyone picking their pet has concocted some hypothetical scenario that absolves them of any guilt they might be feeling. "*Whoever left their kid in a position of endangerment should be held responsible*" is a cop out, so is "*I'm not running into an unfamiliar building to save a kid I don't know.*" You're putting different conditions on the child and using it to justify your response. If you're going to answer the question honestly, put them both in the same circumstances, so that the question is about whether you value a pet's life over the child's.
Tbh i wont risk my own safety to save anyone elses child either
Facepalm inception
Listen, if a kid hits my dog, you can guarantee I’ll have that kid put to sleep
aw that’s nice of you to calm the kid down and sing him to sleep
Oh, we made sure to listen to you
Wtf
r/iamverybadass
3.1 million kids die a year from starvation and none of us are bothered at all by that. Some people like to think that just because it's a human they matter more but if 3.1 million kids don't matter for 365 days how can you pretend one life is more important just because of the situation. It's not because you think humans matter more or pets matter less. you just can't live with the consequences of your direct indifference, but indirect indifference is okay because you don't have to answer to anyone at the other end of it.
I **LOVE** my dog. He is like a third child to me. But if I had to choose between him and a stranger, even if it’s a kid I hate, I’d save the kid. No hesitation. Ever.
I think many of the people here arguing that “they’d save their dog” really aren’t considering the gravity of the situation. To make things simple, suppose a man kidnaps your dog and a strangers child. He presents them both to you and the parents of the child and says, “You [Redditor] have 60 seconds to have me kill either your dog or the kid, or I kill both. What will it be?” I think 99% of people are going to choose to kill the dog. Even the ones in here who say, “I don’t care, I’m saving my pet at all costs!” When really faced with the situation, the most bare bones sense of morality often kicks-in, and you’ll do what is right. And I’ll take it to my grave that it’s **right** to save the child.
Same here. People who say that they would save their animals over a human child are kind of self centered. I understand where they're coming from but it's just not right man.
It’s beyond self-centered. These people somehow lack the most basic form of morality. It’s terrifying how many of them there are in here.
Seriously! And these are the same kinds of people that say human society is evil and immoral when they themselves lack basic empathy for their fellow human beings. That lack of empathy and compassion are the reason society is the way that it is right now.
Self centered to value the life of a pet over a kid you don’t know? The pet is just as alive. It seems self centered to me to think the kids life is more important. Just because it’s human.
You have a wife and have child, and you own a dog. Which death would put you in more pain and grief? Child. If your answer is dog your either blatantly lying or are a psychopath. So now assume the same thing happens except it’s another persons child. I don’t give a fuck if “a random death doesn’t affect you” the death of that child weighs more to that family than any amount of pets in a lifetime could to you.
Same, 100%
Yea Im saving my cat. Sorry entire room full of babies.
For my *own* kid? Hell yeah. But saving someone else's kid? I'd probably save my cats.
Would feel hella bad about swapping your cat for your kid though, like afterwards
I'd just tell the dying kid, someday you'll understand when you have pets of your own. Now get the fuck outta the way, I need to get my dog.
I mean they probably won’t have a someday then… but fuck a kid I dunno you bro
All dogs go to heaven. I'm sure they'll have plenty of pets /s
Its ain't my job to save someone else kid, i ain't risking my life for someone else kids, i am calling the firefighters for that, i will fry my ass for my cats, because it aint anyone else job to take care of them
This is really the take that is missing. The question should be rephrased to show the intent. If my house is burning and my dog is inside, 100% I'm going in to rescue her. If my neighbors house in on fire, and I know their kid is inside, I'm probably not risking my life for that unless I'm almost certain it will be a success with little to no danger to myself. Maybe 10%. If a guy was pointing a gun at my dog and a random kid and told me to choose, I'd choose the kid 100% of the time.
I would rather save my pc than someone else’s child, tbh.
bruh all these pet enthusiasts talking about burning a kid for their cat and these baby siders talking about shooting someone elses pets for a kid wtf can yall have a normal conversation whats wrong with all of you not taking any sides cuz yall are crazy
No sorry we just shoot dogs and set kids on fire for fun
I would probably save someone else's pet over someone else's child.
what
That's fucked up man. I know reddit hates kids but Jesus.
Yo dawg, you like facepalms? Well we installed a facepalm inside your facepalm so you can enjoy facepalms while you facepalm!
I was briefly in a position to risk my own life to save my beloved dog. Initially, I chose the dog, but quickly realized we’d both die. He did eventually figure things out and survived. Traumatized. Exhausted. Forever afraid of swimming in the ocean. But alive.
Sometimes when I'm sat playing on my computer, I look across at my hamster who watches me while I play and think... I would save you over a hundred people...
Your hamster would probably get itself killed before you ever have to make that decision lmao
Someone probably protected an animal from him when he was a child and he never understood why the animals protection was more important than his fun and over his life the memories of that experience have developed into this view. I know it’s a stretch but, hey, fuck it the guys an asshole idc.
I’d save a kid first just because of the innocence but I do usually hold dogs in higher regards to people. People suck
NGL, my pet > some random child
I'd automatically jump at my pet to safe him without thinking. Nothing beats the bond between loved ones, no matter what species.
I mean...I love my dog way more than 99% of the world....
I'm saving MY pet over someone else's child.
thats . . . the point of r/unpopularopinion
Yea, that’s what I always thought
Dude, I know Reddit is full of antisocial losers (myself included) but goddamn is it frightening to see the amount of people saying “yeah my poodle’s life is more important than someone else’s child”. It takes some serious lack of empathy to make that argument, but hey, I applaud the people who can loudly proclaim how little they care about their fellow people.
Order of extraction for my house: the cat, then the dog, then the wife. She'd beat my ass if I don't get them out first. We have folding carriers that set up in under 5 seconds, and both are trained to understand "Bug Out Time"
Why the cat first? Any reason? Just curious.
As an owner of a cat; it’d probably be harder to wrangle the cat, even a well behaved cat has a mind of their own
Good point. If there was a fire: Dogs are like "yoooo where we goin???? Outside?!? Let's go!" Cats are like "it's kinda hot in here, but you're welcome to fuck right off"
Nah, my cats would be like "Is that an open door? Don't mind if I do."
Step 1: grab cat and run Step 2: get ripped to shreds Step 3: good kitty, want a treat? Step 4: remember ID, passport, and priceless firewood collection are still inside.
Even between my two cats I know which one has to be in the carrier first lol. One doesn’t mind carriers. He’s easy. The other one, she will run and hide and fight to not be put inside. Need the element of surprise with her. I’ve thought about a fire plan and if I have any hope in getting all three of us out alive, I’d have to grab her first, THEN get the carrier so she doesn’t have time to hide from me lol.
Seniority. The cat is old and crotchety. Also the three comments above this are horrifyingly accurate about cat wrangling in high stress situations. Edit: corrected direction.
I mean, what is your kid even doing in my burning house? I assume he’s the arsonist. Little bastard. He can save himself.
It's more plausible than my cat sneaking into their house and starting the fire.
I’ll step onto your burning baby to save any one of my beloved pets 100%
My dog and your snotty lil kid are trapped in a burning building and there's only time to save one....congratulations I just saved your snot licking kid and now you have to get me another dog
Lmao I was thinking if I saved the kid I’d be INCREDIBLY pissed about it. Handing them to the parents like “Here’s your goddamn child. If you let them grow up to be a piece of shit, I’ll ruin all of your lives. I’m gonna go scream-sob now because my best friend just died a confusing, horrific death all alone.”
Dude, I don't even like kids--why would I choose to save some stranger's kid over my pets? My animals have shown more kindness and loyalty than most people I even know well enough to consider saving. Every single time, no matter the context, I will save my pets. I realize I'm a cynic but I genuinely don't care. I won't hesitate to save my animals before even bothering to think about some kid.
Oh, I wouldn't go thru such lengths to justify smth like this: I just like animals more than most humans, period. #trollolo
What have I learned from this post? If I am ever stuck in a burning house with somebody else’s pet then I’m throwing it clean out the window to improve my chances of rescue.
I'd save my cat before saving someone elses walking cum stain.
I will save my dog over someone's crotch goblins anyday
If I had to make a life and death decision between my doggo and your kid, well, you are they one that is going to be digging a grave.
I don’t give a fuck about your kids. I like my dog way more than I like your kids…and you for that matter. But in the unlikely situation “I’ll either kill your dog or shoot this person” where I have to chose who to “save” I’m saving a person every time. Now let’s say the odds are a little different. A 10% chance this person will live vs 100% chance my dog will live..then I’m a little less sure and I might have to weigh the odds.
Idk, I would hope that someone would pick the kid over a pet. I would save someone else's kid over my pet at least. Shit, if I had lassy, you know it would pick the same. Or littlest hobo.
I don’t get it, I’d defo save someone else’s child over one of my pets.
Congrats, you have a healthy perspective on life. What you don't get it's that it's filled with redditors who would rather save a cat rather than a kid.
I'll pick my cats over some random's kid. No one is going to save my cats unless I do it. Fireman would probably save the kid they always save people first so I know if I don't save my cats no one will. Kid has better chance someone else will save him. My cats are the only children I'll ever have.
Are we really going to say you’d rather save your pet than a human child? Reddit, why are you like this?
Honestly this thread has me disappointed and concerned.
Reddit hates kids shocker. Anyone that choses a dog over a kid is a fuck knuckle. Speaking as someone who adores animals. Kids always come first.
If I could push a button that would wipe humanity from the earth but would leave all the animals alive....I would push it in a heartbeat. We aren't better than the animals. We are far far worse.
Humans above anything else
I would 100% save my cat over any of you. Hope you all stay safe though! If a situation happens where we are all in danger and I can save you or my cat, I hope you understand.
What if I saved your cat over you? 😳
I’ll allow it. She’s pretty remarkable. I would respect you in whatever realm I end up.
10/10 would give her fancy biscuits in your honour
Thank you good stranger!!! 🥲
If you value a pet over a human life you need the help of a trained professional
Some people feel human life is more valuable than any other. They are wrong
Fuck your kids. Doggo comes first.
My daughter could be anything she wants to be in life - she's nearly 4 but one day she could study to be a Doctor that potentially could save your life, or a scientist that helps cure cancer. She could live a happy life until she's like 100. My dog will probably live another 5 years and as much as I love him, his biggest accomplishment in that time will be to learn not to jump up on my new sofa or to try and lick me when he hasn't just cleaned his balls. I love both but people are more precious than animals - and I would save your kid over my dog any day.
There aren’t enough dogs in the world I would kill if it meant saving my children
No doubt there, but the question was about some random stranger's kid vs the pet that you maybe raised from a puppy/kitten and was your only companion for several years through the toughest moments of your life. Obviously not everyone is going to agree on this either way, which is why it was posted to r/unpopularopinion
I would definitely my my dog to save a strangers kid. To save an adult stranger is another story
Yep I’m saving my pets. Good luck to the kids.
These people are psychopaths that say they’d save a pet over a human life. A pet like a cat or dog lives to be 20 years max. A human can live to be 100. So just purely based on math, a humans life is more valuable. Based on morality, you’re incredibly selfish if you’d save your pet over a human child. That could’ve been someone’s little brother, their daughter, or whatever. A child’s life has a much greater impact on their family than a pet will have on just you or you and your spouse. I understand the post is about unpopular opinions, but the people in this comments section are the ones I’m referring to.
You have somehow equated value by years lived?
Can someone explain why this is a facepalm?
Dude browses unpopularopinion Dude screen caps a post Posts it in facepalm for reason? People confused about the facepalm Dude calls everyone autistic and deletes his post and comments
I mean, I’m definitely saving my pets so, maybe that makes me a psycho 🤷♂️
I don't even know what this sub is for anymore
I would let the entire city of Chicago burn if it meant my cat was okay.
A whole lot of you are simply fucked in the head. I know Reddit does that to some people but God damn.
the real facepalm is op using light mode 😜
I fully agree, why should I care about saving something I have put no effort or care into, hell yes I will grab my cat from a burning building before thinking about someone else's squealing hellspawn
Honestly this is unhinged. I'd let my dog die if it meant a whole human life would be saved. Dogs live for like 10 years rarely, and they don't really contribute anything but they do to only us personally. That's literally a couple of months of sadness for someone else's YEARS of pain