Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs • Hacker News Board

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#51

Post by notRobot » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

amerkhalid wrote: post #40

notRobot wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to go for the kitten, but I'm aware that I'm probably in the minority. I don't think I would be able to live with myself if I chose to save an inanimate object over a living creature. And there's the matter that I am of the firm opinion that art being damaged doesn't stop it from being art. It just adds to the story behind the piece. Also, I fucking love cats.

I thought this was a trick question, wouldn't anyone with empathy save the kitten?

I don't think so. I can see someone going "countless animals die or are deliberately killed every hour, what is one more death in exchange for the continued existence of arguably the most famous painting in human history?"

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#52

Post by kiba » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #34

slumpt_ wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d say the true nature of death isn’t something we gain insight into the older we are, either.

Yeah, probably better worded as we don't understand the impact death has on others until we are older and have experienced those impacts ourselves.

I never quite experienced those impacts myself yet, but I had existential dread early on.

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#53

Post by optimiz3 » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

CreepGin wrote: post #10

Scenario: You are at the Louvre Museum, suddenly there's a big fire. You are standing next to the painting of Mona Lisa that is about to catch on fire. From the corner of your eyes you also see a small kitten collapsed under fallen rubbles and desperately and hopelessly trying to get out. Which one do you rescue first?

The painting. Cats are one of the most invasive species in the world, accounting for countless loss of bird populations and other species (toxoplasma infections in seals for example).

Mona Lisa is irreplaceable. The world won't miss one more cat. Losing an irreplaceable piece of history makes the whole of humanity poorer.

Cats have the evolutionary benefit of being cute to humans. Would you even consider saving say a rat or an eel in such a situation?

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#54

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

CreepGin wrote: post #10

Scenario: You are at the Louvre Museum, suddenly there's a big fire. You are standing next to the painting of Mona Lisa that is about to catch on fire. From the corner of your eyes you also see a small kitten collapsed under fallen rubbles and desperately and hopelessly trying to get out. Which one do you rescue first?

[deleted]

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#55

Post by rixrax » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:37 PM UTC

I assume that this study (based on researchers affiliations) was done in US. I’ll hazard that results are heavily skewed by culture. At least for adult results. For example I would wager that dogs life in Asia or Eastern Europe is much cheaper than in the US. Also, I guess they didn’t include some people on ABC7 news comments section in the study who seemingly would sacrifice any number of humans to save a dogs life.

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#56

Post by haunter » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:37 PM UTC

CreepGin wrote: post #10

Scenario: You are at the Louvre Museum, suddenly there's a big fire. You are standing next to the painting of Mona Lisa that is about to catch on fire. From the corner of your eyes you also see a small kitten collapsed under fallen rubbles and desperately and hopelessly trying to get out. Which one do you rescue first?

Myself, let both there

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#57

Post by chaganated » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:37 PM UTC

lkbm wrote: post #49

chaganated wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the kitten, obviously. it may have consciousness.

I'll bet that if I saved the Mona Lisa, I'd get enough publicity that I could save hundreds of kittens by saying "If you'd like to thank me, please donate to the Humane Society" during an interview.

personal experience with non-profit sector revealed tax-dodges for high-net-worth individuals, and abysmally poor cash-to-cause ratios. still rescuing the kitten. bird in the hand beats two in the bush.

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#58

Post by giantg2 » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:37 PM UTC

ghostbrainalpha wrote: post #20

bigbubba wrote: post #8

Children are ethically immature? Who could have guessed?!?

Or... Adults become so overly conditioned to accept that killing animals for our daily lives is normal, that we no longer register animal death as an ethical issue.

I think it would be more likely that people are just so far removed from the killing in today's society that they don't know/care about the ties to their lives. How many of today's people have actually killed, butchered, and eaten an animal? I imagine the vast majority of people just go pick up pre-cut, pre-packaged meat at the grocery store.

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#59

Post by infofarmer » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:38 PM UTC

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #6

I wonder how many dog lives compared to human lives median adult chose.

Would be a highly theoretical question, but let's hope it would still be «infinite». In practice, killing all the dogs (somehow) would almost certainly result in a significant number of human deaths, widespread suffering, and general chaos.

Re: Children choose to save dogs over humans, adults chose 1 human over 100 dogs

#60

Post by centimeter » Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:39 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #26

0binbrain wrote: post #15

TL;DR but from the summary it says "Socially acquired" which seems like a leap to me. Couldn't it also be as simple as children don't fully understand all the difference between themelves and animals. For example, my 3 year old probably thinks dogs can talk and pilot helicopters.

With all of the Diseny movies that show animals acting like humans && knowing how kids love to watch movies on infinite loop, it's not really hard to imagine why

I often wonder to what degree frequent early exposure to humanoid animals is doing some kind of damage to people's social cognition. I think there's plenty of evidence to be had online that it's doing pretty significant damage to at least some people. But I wonder if it's also behind widespread harmful social effects like the concept of "fur babies".