• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Your Dog and a Stranger Are Drowning-Which Do You Save?

I don't have a dog, but I'd like to think if I did and we had a good life, that he'd be just that cool to be OK with trying to escape himself. Help the stranger he'd (she'd) say, I got this.
 
rhinefire said:
Your life long companion dog and a stranger are drowning and you can only save one.....chose.
Click to expand...

Since I swim like a rock, I'd probably not try to save either unless I could do it from shore. That said, very seldom does a dog drown unless the waters are so dangerous that no normal person would survive an attempted rescue. I've seen and heard of many instances where a person has drowned trying to save a dog only to have the dog make it to shore unharmed.

I love my dog and all the dogs I've owned in my lifetime, but this is a matter where common sense must prevail over emotions.
 
TiredOfLife said:
A good answer, and it's also correct.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. A teen's life is not worth more than an elderly person's life. This is all subjective reasoning, and it depends on the values of the one who is in the position to make the choice.
 
lizzie said:
Not necessarily. A teen's life is not worth more than an elderly person's life. This is all subjective reasoning, and it depends on the values of the one who is in the position to make the choice.
Click to expand...
In this case it's biological objectivity and there is only one choice.
 
The only moral choice is to save the human.


With that said, letting my dog drown while I saved some stranger would really suck... but I'd almost certainly save the stranger. Humans > animals.
 
TiredOfLife said:
In this case it's biological objectivity and there is only one choice.
Click to expand...

Well, you are presuming that the teen has longer to live than the elderly person - the younger person may have a rare cancer and only months or days to live while the elderly person may be perfectly healthy. To top it off, the elderly person may actually be very close to discovering the cure for the cancer that dooms the teen and others like the teen and you'd just let the elderly person wash away.
 
TiredOfLife said:
Because it's not really a choice unless you are concerned that you will drown trying so you pick the closet.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, you don't speak for me. What you might do is not automatically what i would do. I've already said what i would do.
I would choose whoever was in the most difficulty, irrespective of the age. All things being equal in relation to the difficulty they were in i would choose whoever i could get to first because if they were both drowning i would have a greater chance of helping the one closest to me when you take into account that time would be a factor.

It is not part of my job nor is it my right to decide who has a right to live or die.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Well, you are presuming that the teen has longer to live than the elderly person - the younger person may have a rare cancer and only months or days to live while the elderly person may be perfectly healthy. To top it off, the elderly person may actually be very close to discovering the cure for the cancer that dooms the teen and others like the teen and you'd just let the elderly person wash away.
Click to expand...


Eh, those are some pretty improbable scenarios. Just sayin'.
 
lizzie said:
There is always more than one choice, if you are choosing from two possibilities.
Click to expand...
Not really. Years of cancer or a fatal stroke? Jumping or burning to death? Heaven or Hell? Those are two possibilities with only one real answer.
 
No contest....the dog

There's no chance that the dog will grab me around the neck in panic and drag me down to drown with it.
 
I am kind of surprised at the amount of people who choose dog - and seeing this brings another question to mind. Why is that putting a beloved dog out of their misery is so commonplace while doing the same for a human is taboo?

I do not have a dog, and have not since I was a child, and even though I loved that dog dearly I would opt for saving the human life first, even if a stranger. Interesting question, and it explores the tendency of humans to be more dispassionate to those that are further removed from them into a new light. Is a cherished dog - further removed from your "tribe" than an unknown fellow human?
 
lizzie said:
A teen's life is not worth more than an elderly person's life.
Click to expand...

But it is! Ask an old person and listen to what s/he's gonna say. :)
 
Throw something floaty to the human.

Save the dog.

Save the human.

Kobayashi Maru ftw.
 
Goshin said:
Eh, those are some pretty improbable scenarios. Just sayin'.
Click to expand...

Sure they are, but you never know - which is why I question someone saying there's a "right" answer when it's impossible to know all the circumstances.
 
TiredOfLife said:
In this case it's biological objectivity and there is only one choice.
Click to expand...

You have two kids and they are involved in an accident. Ones 4 and ones 15. They are both at risk of dying. Going by your idiotic logic the 15 year old isn't worth saving.
 
Serenity said:
Nonsense, you don't speak for me. What you might do is not automatically what i would do. I've already said what i would do.
I would choose whoever was in the most difficulty, irrespective of the age. All things being equal in relation to the difficulty they were in i would choose whoever i could get to first because if they were both drowning i would have a greater chance of helping the one closest to me when you take into account that time would be a factor.

It is not part of my job nor is it my right to decide who has a right to live or die.
Click to expand...
That's even more interesting, your reluctance to Play God. In this case, you are God. One lives and one dies. That's it. I think the problem is you don't want to have to pick but that's normal on a planet where we are the little gods. Not choosing, or feeling that you don't have the right to, is also a choice.
 
Serenity said:
You have two kids and they are involved in an accident. Ones 4 and ones 15. They are both at risk of dying. Going by your idiotic logic the 15 year old isn't worth saving.
Click to expand...


In that case, triage says you try to save the one with the best chance of survival first. Which isn't the point you were making, I know... in reality of course this is another choice that would suck industrial waste and have you waking up at night in a cold sweat for decades to come.
 
Serenity said:
You have two kids and they are involved in an accident. Ones 4 and ones 15. They are both at risk of dying. Going by your idiotic logic the 15 year old isn't worth saving.
Click to expand...

In this case, if I have to pick one to save, I save the 15-year-old especially if it's a girl. She can make another 4-year-old and chances are so can I. Brutal huh? Life here is, if you're dealing with it honestly but most can't.
 
TiredOfLife said:
Not really. Years of cancer or a fatal stroke? Jumping or burning to death? Heaven or Hell? Those are two possibilities with only one real answer.
Click to expand...

No, that is not the case. There are at least two choices when more than one subject is at stake. That choice depends on the subjective values of the individual making the choice.
 
rhinefire said:
Your life long companion dog and a stranger are drowning and you can only save one.....chose.
Click to expand...

Obviously the stranger. Humans come before animals.
 
TiredOfLife said:
That's even more interesting, your reluctance to Play God. In this case, you are God. One lives and one dies. That's it. I think the problem is you don't want to have to pick but that's normal on a planet where we are the little gods. Not choosing, or feeling that you don't have the right to, is also a choice.
Click to expand...

It's not a Paramedics job to play God and any that feel it is shouldn't be working as one. Now that doesn't mean that i don't go home some days a mess because i've been involved in administering care to someone who may have caused an accident where they live and others die (just to use one example) and i'm not going to pretend it doesn't affect me because it does, sometimes it ****s me up big time but i deal with that after. When you are involved in a scene you cannot make judgements Ever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom