Why do some people value animals over human lives?

[QUOTE=DeuceWallaces]Why don't we just [B]travel back in time[/B] to warn our past selves, or maybe create an [B][I]alternate universe[/I][/B] or dimension to send the surplus population? [COLOR="DarkOrange"][B]How about floating cities?[/B][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Stop trying to derail an obvious legit solution. There are already talks of Mars colonization as we speak, so to compare it to [I]"floating cities and time travel"[/I] is complete utter bullsh*t. The soil on Mars can be useful for construction and industrial materials, compounds with high chemical energy can be manufactured, solar power can be used for energy, they can even use certain processes to make food, etc.

It is extremely practical and can solve the population problem. By the time the earth blows over (about 100 years right?), we will have the technological advances for affordable space flight and affordable space stations to make this plausible (it'll be quicker if the situation calls for it). [B][I]That is the beauty of humans having such a gifted human mind.[/I][/B] We solve problems, not give up and wipe out half of the population out of fear.

[QUOTE=moe94]I was going to make this thread. lol

To people with pets, would you let a perfect stranger die if it meant your pet could live?[/QUOTE]

Yes. Is that even a serious ****ing question?

why do people value animal life over plant life?????

[QUOTE=moe94]

To people with pets, would you let a perfect stranger die if it meant your pet could live?[/QUOTE]

yep, without hesitation or guilt

[QUOTE=MMM]why do people value animal life over plant life?????[/QUOTE]

Because plants do not have feelings, do not feel pain, and aren't conscious, as far as we know.

On the other hand, humans have more complex emotions and are more conscious than animals ergo a human life should be valued over an animal life - at least that is one interpretation.

Hence the topic.


[QUOTE=Lamar Doom]yep, without hesitation or guilt[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=russwest0]Yes. Is that even a serious ****ing question?[/QUOTE]


And what if it was not a stranger? What if it was...

a) a pregnant mother
b) a pediatric oncologist
c) your friend/cousin/uncle/aunt

[QUOTE=oarabbus]Yeah you're right about the bolded... but how about rats/other rodents, or bears, snakes, wasps, mosquitos, termites, etc? No, it's not their fault for acting upon their instincts, but as human beings it is to our advantage to not have termites destroying the foundations of our homes, mosquitos spreading disease, and snakes biting people etc.




OK, but what about the intelligence of a human being, and our higher level of consciousness? Simply the fact that you were able to write what you wrote, and the fact that we experience a level of consciousness where we can have this discussion makes us superior to animals.[/QUOTE]

of course mosquitos and rats have to be squashed, they spread disease.

You don't get it? You ever been in a family of abusive drunks, drug addicts, and all together selfish *****? I take it you haven't. People value animals more than humans because an animal never screws you over, puts conditions on your love, or back stabs you after years of friendship. If you don't get it then you haven't lived or experienced enough of our human race.

[QUOTE=oarabbus]:confusedshrug: I just don't get it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm against animal cruelty, it's disgusting and abhorrent. But you know the train problem? Something like, 5 people are about to be hit by a train, you can flip the switch and divert the train, but it will then kill a single individual?


If there was a human being trapped on one side, and 10 animals on the other... sorry Fido, but I'm saving the human being. Again, I am NOT condoning any kind of violence or mistreatment of animals, but does anyone else out there consider a human life to be more valuable than that of an animal? PETA types will absolutely roast you for being an animal hater and despicable person for saying this, but don't explain their logic.[/QUOTE]
There are different values:

One is universally agreed value: "All human lives are equal" or "Humans are more valuable than animals".

Second is subjective value: "My family/pet/money is more important than a stranger" or "A rapist is worth less than dirt".

For example, my family is worth more than all the strangers in the world. I would let everyone else die before my family. This is despite knowing that all human lives are equal.

Not hard to understand at all.

Some animals are more important to the benefit life preservation than humans. Like Einstein said, if all the bees die on the Earth, humans would only have four years to live.

But if all the bees do die, this will cause a dominos effect since bees pollinate plants, which helps them reproduce. If this does not occur, they will die out and become extinct. Animals that eat plants, in generalize guess, will die out too. We are talking about a mass extinction based upon one animal species.

I think humans don't really have an significant positive contribute to the ecosystems of the world if we all die out. But correct me if I'm wrong. I always wondered about that.

I just figure if you look at that type ideology that humans don't contribute to the world's ecosystem in a positive attribute, then we are not the most important animals to preserve this planet we're in. Thus, we are insignificant. We could be consider as leaches or a virus without predators to check and balance us.

And with that, I think it is logically to hold some animals above human lives to extent for the preserve life as we know it. This will cause us to live longer as well on this planet as well as other animals. And like that, we're not the most important animals on the planet to keep life going.

Plants>Humans on Earth. Plant powah 4 life.

[QUOTE=oarabbus]Because plants do not have feelings, do not feel pain, and aren't conscious, as far as we know.

On the other hand, humans have more complex emotions and are more conscious than animals ergo a human life should be valued over an animal life - at least that is one interpretation.

Hence the topic.
[/QUOTE]

I can see that. But without plants, you'll have more mass extinction. Humans are unique due to their conscious and incredible intellect, but I don't think they are more important than plants that keeps us and a lot of other humans to survive. Complex emotions and the ability to self aware doesn't matter with preserving life and the facet of survival. Plant life are more important than us at keeping life around, at least as we know it.

So, in that way plants should be more valued than humans. Plants could cause multiple mass extinction if they die out. Humans would not...at least I don't think. Even though humans aren't as important to the Earth, we would strive upon keeping ourselves alive.

In most of these cases where someone says he would rather choose a few strangers to suffer or die for the well being of an animal, they are talking about their pet.
How can someone say that? Just imagine on one side you have 100 stangers and on the other you have one person you love the most. Now you have to choose who lives, whats your choice?

[QUOTE=moe94]To people with pets, would you let a perfect stranger die if it meant your pet could live?[/QUOTE]
yes

[QUOTE=Clyde]yup, my dog is part of my family.[/QUOTE]
this, to answer the OPs question, i think animals are obviously more important when you're connected, if it was some random ass animal then nah.

never own a pet but i think in most cases i would choose a stranger over a pet. Losing a pet would be difficult but the stranger could have a family to support, etc. If the stranger was a child or female i think the odds are in the favour of the stranger over the pet.

[QUOTE=MMM]never own a pet but i think in most cases i would choose a stranger over a pet. Losing a pet would be difficult but the stranger could have a family to support, etc. If the stranger was a child or female i think the odds are in the favour of the stranger over the pet.[/QUOTE]
well then you are putting the question into context. Then can just as well assume that the person is the biggest douche or an asshole.