The classic 'Who would you save, your drowning dog or a stranger?' question

[Idle Thoughts]

...And you only have time to save one of them.


Seriously. Who would you save?



(for those of you who have no dog, just imagine how it would be if you did have one)



And no, don't say your dog can swim. A common way to get out of answering this question. Doesn't matter if can swim or not. At the moment he happens to be drowning, not swimming.





You're standing on a piece of land that juts out into the water. The person to the left, the dog to the right. Both an equal distance away, but too far to save both.


Who do you save? And why?




This sort of question, There is no right or wrong answer. Both answers would be justified. The focus is meant to be put upon the meaning behind the question, not the hypothetical.


The real question: whose life do you care more about? Your dog, or a complete stranger? Screw the drowning scenario, screw trying to find a way to save them both (and dodge the question, incidentally), just which life is more important to you?




But putting it in a situation, lets say they are both drowning.


Who do you save?



I'd save my dog over a stranger, for reasons I shall explain tomorrow.

[Joe Random]

Originally posted by Idle Thoughts
You're standing on a piece of land that juts out into the water. The person to the left, the dog to the right. Both an equal distance away, but too far to save both.


Who do you save? And why?

Who: The stranger.
Why: Because I feel that human life is intrinsically more valuable than canine life. The question you posed tries to make it more personal by making it your dog versus a stranger, but that person is someone else's son or daughter, mother or father, sister or brother, husband or wife. The person is more valuable to someone than the dog is to anyone.

The real question: whose life do you care more about? Your dog, or a complete stranger? Screw the drowning scenario, screw trying to find a way to save them both (and dodge the question, incidentally), just which life is more important to you?

I value the stranger over my dog. In fact, I would normally value any human life over any non-human life.

[Epimetheus]

Tough choice.

I am familiar with my dog, and have an emotional bond with him. I would see his pain and wish it to end.

The stranger.. Hard to say. He could be anybody, mass murderer, the one that was threw my dog in the water to watch him drown, only he fell in as well, anything really.

If the dog is young, and the stranger old, it could be better to save my dog, as he will have many more years to yap and jump about. If the dog is old, and the stranger young, I would probably save the stranger. I might regret it later, no doubt said stranger will do nothing more than give a bit of thanks and walk off, perhaps even sue me for holding him a bit tight or if CPR is necessary, he may even sue me over a bruised rib. Meanwhile the dog will be loyal forever for that act of kindness.

Choices choices.

[Jon the Geek]

I agree exactly with Joe Random. It wouldn't even be a tough decision... and I'm a dog lover. Admittedly, I don't currently have a dog... but I tried to check if it was right by imagining my parents dog, my sister's dog, or any of the dogs I had growing up somehow brought back to life.

Actually, ok, I'd save the dog that had been brought back to life, purely out of scientific curiosity--if I could figure out how the dog came back, I could then save the stranger after the fact

[CarnalK]

Unless it was a child I would instinctively say my dog. I guess I just feel completely responsible for his safety but only partially for my fellow man.

"The person is more valuable to someone than the dog is to anyone."

Then why don't they save him?

[John Mace]

No question, the stranger. Sorry, Fido, but that's the way it goes.

As per the other posters, I value human life more than canine.

BTW, it's really not good etiquite here to use the old "I'll tell you my reasons tomorrow." This is GD, not "can you stump the Dopers". In fact, typically I wouldn't answer an open ended OP like this. But he answer is glaringly obvious.

[Morpheous]

Gee...that's tough one, as I would be tempted to save neither. But as I really hated my dog, I my first instinct would be to just watch to make sure she drowned.

But I guess I would eventually save the stranger because he/she is valued by somebody.

[verbenabeast]

humans > dogs

I would most likely be emotionally traumatized... at the very least I would feel REAL bad. but I have to believe a human life has more value than a canine....

[CarnalK]

Well I'll take up the banner John.

Basically I've made a strong commitment to keep another animal safe and loyal to me. In some ways (and to varying degrees) dogs become extensions of the owner. You could similarly ask me if I'd give up a foot for a stranger. To which I would say hell no. This despite the math that a whole person is more valuable than my foot.

Now I may risk my life to save a stranger but the active word is "risk". I ain't trading. Which is one of the reasons these moral dilemma questions are frequently so useless.

[JThunder]

The human being. This isn't even a matter of deliberation, as far as I'm concerned.

[LVBoPeep]

The dog.. the stranger will pull me under . However, if its a matter of no risk to me, I would pick the stranger in most cases. However- there is one dog I own that I could not let drown. Can't explain it.. I'm usually a realist about my animals, though I care for all of them quite a bit... but this dog is different.

[CharlesW]

I was standing there pondering the question, and they both drowned. Oh well.

Hard choice. I wouldn't know until it happened. Hopefuly it never will. I would feel real bad either way. Either I let a fellow human die, and save my dog. Living with the grief. On the other hand I save the fellow human, and let an animal that has unlimitted amount of love die.

[RotorHead]

Easy: the person. My belief is that human life is intrinsically more valuable than that of an animal. The sadness from losing the dog would be far outweighed by the joy of saving a person's life.

[Palo Verde]

The stranger of course.

No question.

Imagine if you are drowning and you see your one hope diving in the water... and then see him turn away from you and go for the poodle over there.

[Ale]

I´m appaled to see that "of course I´ll save the fellow human" is not the unanimous answer; not only it´s a matter of moral values, c´mon it´s a FELLOW HUMAN BEING, your brother/sister in some way, I can´t grasp the idea of favouring the life of an animal over that, I really can´t. Besides, if you let a person drown while you boldly rescue Fido, you´d probably be in lots of trouble with the law, I don`t know what kind of law that would violate, but homicide by negligence or something along that line could be an option.

[Dragon Phoenix]

I'll appal you a bit more. My dog. No question about it. I know my dog, I love my dog. I don't see why I have to give up my dog and rescue a stranger, just because he happens to be of the same species as I am.

[Joe Random]

Originally posted by Dragon Phoenix
I don't see why I have to give up my dog and rescue a stranger, just because he happens to be of the same species as I am.

If you decide to abandon the human and save the dog, you have condemmed someone to have to suffer through the death of their father, brother, or son; mother, sister or daughter.

More likely you're condemming a number of people to suffer the agony of losing a loved one, crying themselves to sleep at night, and trying to rebuild their shattered lives. All so you could save a dog who's death couldn't possibly cause that level of suffering.

I don't care how much I love my pet; no dog is worth that much.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that anyone who chose the dog over the stranger is someone who has not yet had to suffer through the death of a loved one. That's not something I would wish on anyone else.

[JThunder]

Originally posted by Dragon Phoenix
I'll appal you a bit more. My dog. No question about it. I know my dog, I love my dog. I don't see why I have to give up my dog and rescue a stranger, just because he happens to be of the same species as I am.

Would you feel the same way about an innocent baby? After all, if the baby is a total stranger, and personal attachment is all that matters to you, then why wouldn't you choose your dog over this helpless, innocent child?

[Alietta]

No question about it, I would save my dog.

Human life is not precious at all. There are more than 6 billion of us. We're not going extinct anytime soon. We'll destroy the entire planet and rape it before we die off.

[JThunder]

So as long as the human race doesn't go extinct, it's okay to let people die?

Great googly moogly.

[Alietta]

Originally posted by Ale
c´mon it´s a FELLOW HUMAN BEING, your brother/sister in some way, I can´t grasp the idea of favouring the life of an animal over that, I really can´t.

Just because we are the same species doesn't mean jack. I have been lied to, betrayed, and hurt by my fellow human beings.

Animals and humans are all just a bunch of cells. I don't see anything that sets humans much better than dogs.

[Dragon Phoenix]

Originally posted by Joe Random
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that anyone who chose the dog over the stranger is someone who has not yet had to suffer through the death of a loved one. That's not something I would wish on anyone else.

Obviously, I can't speak for the others who preferred to rescue their dog, but I have had the experience of my mother dying of cancer and slowly losing her mind in the process. There goes your theory.

Baby versus dog? More difficult, I agree.

[gouda]

Originally posted by Joe Random
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that anyone who chose the dog over the stranger is someone who has not yet had to suffer through the death of a loved one. That's not something I would wish on anyone else.

Having not been through such a situation yet, I say with firm conviction - my dog, without a moment's doubt. Maybe my opinion would change after I experience the pain of losing a loved one. Maybe. But as of today, I'd take my dog over the stranger.

Selfish, I know. So sue me.

[Alietta]

Originally posted by JThunder
So as long as the human race doesn't go extinct, it's okay to let people die?

Great googly moogly.

Humans don't care about killing other animals, or even each other. I say yes.

[Joe Random]

Originally posted by Alietta
Humans don't care about killing other animals, or even each other.

Wow, could you find a broader brush to paint everyone with? I don't know what kind of people you've been around to make you feel this way, but I hope you don't turn out the same as them. Although your willingness to condemn someone to death because of crappy past experiences with people indicates that you're well on your way to that eventuality.

[Brutus]

My dog gets saved, of course.

All this talk of helping out a 'fellow human' and 'the brotherhood of man' is heartwarming and all, but a bunch of hypocritical rot.

Everyday that petowner feeds his dog, he is not giving that money (dare I say, 'and food'?) to charity. Everyday, people die of starvation in the world. You chose the life of your dog over the life of an anonymous human being. The rest of you non-pet owners aren't off the hook, either. You bought a TV? What, with all the starvation going on in the world, and you spent a couple hundred life-giving dollars on a TV?

Kaiser gets saved, Brutus goes home happy to feed Kaiser and watch his new TV, and they all (well...) live happily ever after.

[Joe Random]

Originally posted by Brutus
Everyday that petowner feeds his dog, he is not giving that money (dare I say, 'and food'?) to charity.

There's a big difference between not donating to some nebulous charity and letting a person die right in fron of you when you could have prevented it. There's really no comparison.

[The MacDairmuid]

Originally posted by Joe Random
If you decide to abandon the human and save the dog, you have condemmed someone to have to suffer through the death of their father, brother, or son; mother, sister or daughter.

More likely you're condemming a number of people to suffer the agony of losing a loved one, crying themselves to sleep at night, and trying to rebuild their shattered lives. All so you could save a dog who's death couldn't possibly cause that level of suffering.

I don't care how much I love my pet; no dog is worth that much.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that anyone who chose the dog over the stranger is someone who has not yet had to suffer through the death of a loved one. That's not something I would wish on anyone else.

What about the agony I'd go through knowing that I deliberately let my dog die by drowning (a personal fear of mine) after so many years of friendship (she lived 17 years), so that I could save someone I'd never met.

Let's not forget the agony of my sister, and brothers, and parents, and their knowing that Sandy died as a result of my decision. When Sandy (my dog) finally did die of old age, she was the same age as my sister. Sandy was as much a family member as any of us humans.

You should also know that Sandy--at least once--put her life on the line to guard mine. A bear had invaded our wilderness campsite and Sandy chased it into a tree and then drove it off. Later that day Roving Ranger Dan told us to be ware because there was an "aggressive female with two cubs" in the valley.


So you're asking me to choose between a stranger, or my friend for over half my life who has at least once defended my own life.

I'm saving my dog.

[Brutus]

Originally posted by Joe Random
There's a big difference between not donating to some nebulous charity and letting a person die right in fron of you when you could have prevented it. There's really no comparison.

Nebulous charity? Au contraire! There are many charities, (Doctors without Borders comes to mind) that are far from nebulous. They are saving lives every day. With your donations, they could save more. With my donations, they could save more, but I won't give 'em a red cent.

Every day, we all make decisions that if made differently, would save lives. We choose not too.

Don't get me wrong, I am not being judgemental. My little Kaiser snookums is 'just a dog', but hell, I would probably kill someone to save him, much less let someone die through an act of omission. (Technically, my parents dog, but who does he come running to when we all call him? Hell ya, me!)

[gouda]

My dog's name is Brutus

And let me second what Brutus has just stated.

Right now, I feel like going home and giving my dog a great big hug and then coming back to work!!

[Mangetout]

In every news story I've ever heard, the rescuer drowns and the hapless human and bedraggled dog somehow manage to struggle ashore; I'd not rescue either, but run to the nearest phone and call the coastguard.

[robertliguori]

I second Brutus's points. I have an obligation to my dog. I have no obligation to such random stranger. And arguments about his possible family are bunk. He may well be a serial killer and I may be saving dozens by letting him drown. There's no way to know for sure.

[jsgoddess]

Originally posted by Brutus
Everyday that petowner feeds his dog, he is not giving that money (dare I say, 'and food'?) to charity. Everyday, people die of starvation in the world. You chose the life of your dog over the life of an anonymous human being. The rest of you non-pet owners aren't off the hook, either. You bought a TV? What, with all the starvation going on in the world, and you spent a couple hundred life-giving dollars on a TV?

*bing*

I've already chosen. My cats get fed with money I could have used to help a person.

And my charitable money goes to... animal rescue.

Julie

[Mangetout]

Originally posted by jsgoddess
I've already chosen. My cats get fed with money I could have used to help a person.

8 out of 10 cats prefer to be fed with cat food.

A Hahahaha

[5-HT]

I'd choose my dog. I feel that canine life is inherently more valuable than human life. Hell, I'd switch places with the dog and drown myself to save my dogs life.

[jsgoddess]

Originally posted by Mangetout
8 out of 10 cats prefer to be fed with cat food.

A Hahahaha

Mine have very expensive tastes!

Er, or something?

Julie

[Sinful]

I wouldn't save either. No use making me a third victim that could possibly die. Instead I would dial 911 for help and let the pros handle it.

Of course if I had to save one or the other I would probably help which ever one has been in the longest, probably the dog if the human went after it or vice versa. If I didn't know which one was in first I would save the human first because they would be much easier to save since they would understand what would exactly need to be done, if you know what I mean?

[hansel]

Thus the flaw with all such hypothetical questions: They demand a rational justification for irrational, gut-level decisions.

If you'd save your dog instead of a stranger, then that's what'll happen. Don't torture moral philosophy trying to justify it, though.

[catsix]

From a purely practical standpoint, a drowning human is a very dangerous thing and it's a very very bad idea to get within arm's reach of them in the water, as they will try to climb on top of you in order to stay afloat, and could end up drowning you.

I'm not so sure a dog can do that.

[The Great Unwashed]

I'd ask the stranger this question. If they answered "I'd save my dog," I'd push them under myself.

[Dogface]

Save a shipmate before a stranger.
Save a stranger before a dog.
Save a dog before a soldier.

Alleged saying of British sailors.

[X~Slayer(ALE)]

Originally posted by Alietta
Humans don't care about killing other animals, or even each other. I say yes.

If its between my dog and Alietta, then I am definitely saving my dog.

if it were anyone else, my dog comes second. I love my dog but if she's stupid enuf to not know how to swim then she floats home. I would make the person I saved get me another dog tho.

[cowgirl]

[astonished] I agree with Brutus! [/astonished]

And, I will add: People do horrible things to other people, every single day. It's just not usually as clear-cut as this - you don't see the people that are harmed by your actions, and the causation is not so clear. But around the world people die, daily, so that others can benefit - indirectly. It's just the way things work. Se we can say to ourselves : this act that I am committing, when combined with countless other commissions of this act, will bring harm or death to some people that I can't identify. This makes the action much more acceptible than when it is so clearly defined.

[Palo Verde]

People do cruel things, but a lot of people also do wonderful, loving things to each other every day.

The person you save might be a serial killer. Or he could be the next MLK or Ghandi.

I seriously question the morality of anyone who would chose a dog over a person.

[Isabelle]

I would save my Princess Puppy. I have 5 kids and none of them love me like this dog. I would be lost without her. Besides I don't believe animals go to heaven and people do. So the person drowing has a better chance of landing in a better place.

[Super Gnat]

I'd save the person. IMHO, a human life is worth more than that of a dog.

[badmana]

Oh hell, I would (have) killed for my cat so it wouldn't even be a thought process over who I would save. The dog (in my case my late cat) would have been saved and even if I had the time to try to save the stranger, I might not bother until I was sure my dog/cat was fine.

Yeah yeah, cold hearted and evil (and all that stuff) but as others have pointed out, humans are the only animals that have done me harm. My cat on the other hand has been by my side (figuratively speaking) for 18.5 years.

[badmana]

Originally posted by autz
I seriously question the morality of anyone who would chose a dog over a person.

I would rather know people who would feel devotion to their animals, whom they have bonded with and feel responsible for, than a human who would throw all that away for a total stranger just because they were human. That is immoral in my books.

My morals are very strong and I will not harm my fellow humans without a good reason but I also feel that my bonds are unbreakable and I will hold faith with my friends, my loves and my dependants. My cat (or dog in this case) will have become my dependant and I will honour my agreement with my animals to provide shelter, food and a loving environment and protection from any and all that would do them harm. I wouldn't save a child over anyone I care for (and by "care for" I mean any and all life dear to me).

If you feel this is immoral, that's cool, I like being at least consistant in my morality. People who say "I love animals" and then save a human they don't love (aka a stranger) is rather odd to me.

[badmana]

Originally posted by autz
I seriously question the morality of anyone who would chose a dog over a person.

I would rather know people who would feel devotion to their animals, whom they have bonded with and feel responsible for, than a human who would throw all that away for a total stranger just because they were human. That is immoral in my books.

My morals are very strong and I will not harm my fellow humans without a good reason but I also feel that my bonds are unbreakable and I will hold faith with my friends, my loves and my dependants. My cat (or dog in this case) will have become my dependant and I will honour my agreement with my animals to provide shelter, food and a loving environment and protection from any and all that would do them harm. I wouldn't save a child over anyone I care for (and by "care for" I mean any and all life dear to me).

If you feel this is immoral, that's cool, I like being at least consistant in my morality. People who say "I love animals" and then save a human they don't love (aka a stranger) is rather odd to me.

[Joe Random]

Originally posted by badmana
My morals are very strong and I will not harm my fellow humans without a good reason but I also feel that my bonds are unbreakable and I will hold faith with my friends, my loves and my dependants. My cat (or dog in this case) will have become my dependant and I will honour my agreement with my animals to provide shelter, food and a loving environment and protection from any and all that would do them harm. I wouldn't save a child over anyone I care for (and by "care for" I mean any and all life dear to me).

I sincerely doubt that your bonds are unbreakable. There's always a breaking point, even for me. What if you had to choose between your dog or a school bus loaded with kindergarteners? Say a bomb was strapped to your dog and the bus, and you only had time to diffuse one of them? I feel confident that even the most adament of the I'd-save-my-dog people would save the busload of children.

People who say "I love animals" and then save a human they don't love (aka a stranger) is rather odd to me.

I think this may hold the key to the differing opinions. I like animals, but I have found that I am completely incapable of loving an animal to the same degree that I'd love a human. Frankly, the fact that people can love a dog as if that dog were their child baffles me.