All joking aside, I voted human immediately.
I happen to be a human. I do hope y’all realized that already.
If not, then sorry but I am a Homo sapiens sapiens, male model 19600826.
I have three children who, though they are grown and have progeny themselves, are still so precious to me that I would literally take a bullet for any them.
This is a Skald-level hypothetical.
That is to say mind-blowing.
Some may be or may think they are serious, others may just be, as it were, poking an anthill with a stick.
Or vice versa.
Sitting here, anonymously at my computer, I can say that I rather prefer pandas to babies, in the sense that I abstractly prefer animals to most humans. My Nigel once said that I’d save my cat from peril before his son, and I told him "To be honest, I *would *agonize over it, but I feel pretty confident that if such a horrific situation presented itself I would absolutely save his son (or any other child / human). I would then spend the rest of my life resenting the both of them (I’m only half kidding). I can say that I have a deeper love/ connection for my cat than for his son, but shit, I don’t think I’ve allowd my priorities to become *that *fucked up.
Why not save the panda, put it in a zoo, and sell tickets? Then use the proceeds to feed starving orphan babies or something. It’s win-win!
Perhaps it makes more sense to reinvest the proceeds in more pandas, but eventually there’s going to be some sort of diminishing returns. I’m not sure a zoo with 10 pandas really attracts more people than a zoo with 9. You could distribute them among multiple zoos, but there’s other costs that go along with that.
At any rate, there’s probably some optimal number of pandas to save.
I thought you’d think we think we’re serious… but now I’m not sure what to think.
Not even if it was Kung Fu Panda.
I seriously picked the panda, but I would feel terrible about leaving the baby to die.
Another reason is that no one would hate you or call you a paedophile for saving a panda. Last week, I prevented a two-year old from falling from the eight metre ledge it was dangling from. The irresponsible mother didn’t say thanks and she stared at me with such malice. I would still save a child in the future but its points against the baby in this scenario.
If I had to make a split second decision, then I would definitely pick the panda. I have become to accustomed to babies in paddling pools to immediately notice the problem, whereas the panda would capture my focus especially as it isn’t known to swim. The emotional trauma for the family wouldn’t immediately come into my head
Baby. Easiest answer ever. Hell, I’d shoot the last panda on earth to save a baby and sleep soundly that night. Sure the big picture is that allowing the panda to die marches the species an inch or so closer towards extinction, but the even bigger picture is that millions of species have gone extinct and millions more will. Why should I care too much about a silly vegetarian carnivore that is too stupid to mate? If you think about the big picture too much than the species is doomed anyway you look at it. How much value do I get knowing that children in the distant future (and long after I’m dead) will get to see pandas in zoos a little bit longer?
That’s why I prefer to think about the little picture, me and humanity. I don’t think I could live with the guilt I’d feel for allowing someone’s child to die when I could have saved them. I’d want someone to save the child if it was mine whose life was on the line, so it would be hypocritical for me to choose panda.
Oh, I agree, it’s not my primary reason (that would be "It’s a fucking baby, for fuck’s sake. ") It’s more just a counter to those who go “But … pandas are sooo rare and endangered”. Basically yeah, but a) that doesn’t counter the fact that it’s a human baby and b) yeah, they’re so rare and endangered that they’re really way the hell on the wrong side of the triage line, bucko.
[QUOTE=Cat Whisperer]
You could argue that humans are, too.
[/QUOTE]
At 7 Billion? Not bloody likely.
The panda, of course. There’s more eating on 'em.
We’re endangering ourselves from the other end - overpopulation (in my opinion, of course).
I have yet to see a compelling argument in either thread as to why humans should always get priority. There is this vague “soul” thing, the self-evident fact that there must be something wrong with you and a lot of hang-wringing and retching, but no one has so far made it clear why we should give our own kind priority.
Usually, I would try to rescue a person if possible. Of course, I would not endanger myself for a DA candidate, and there might be other circumstances that I would willfully allow a person to die, but no one has convinced me that the mere fact of being human automatically qualifies someone for rescue priority.
Word. Fuck that woo. One time I knocked my own babe off my tit to feed a rejected Panda and not a single person could give me a scientific reason I was wrong.
I’ll try to provide one.
I don’t believe in souls. Well, I believe in soul music and soul cooking and soul train, but not magical spirits that animate our bodies and exist after our deaths.
You got ir right there, in your last sentence. “Our own kind.”
Humans are a social species. We have evolved to live most efficiently and prosperously in groups. Among the adaptions entailed in that is greater sympathy for beings of our own species than for beings of other species. Now this isn’t entirely a good thing; taken to extremes it can lead not merely to abuses of animals but also to unjustifiable crimes against our fellow humans. But nonetheless we are hard-wired to care more about what happens to our own species than about what happens to others, and emotions are the devices evolution “uses” to prompt us in the best directions for the species’ survival.
Add to that the social contract. Unless you’re a hermit, you participate in it. Humans live in communities and expect our neighbors to assist them at need–sometimes through acts of charity, sometimes through institutions such as police departments, hospitals, and so forth; sometimes for a price, sometimes out of compassion. This contract works two ways. Expecting your neighbors to call 911 if they see your house on fire means you have to call 911 if you see their houses on fire. Animals in general cannot participate in this; they lack the intelligence and ability to communicate that belonging to a human-style community requires. (Note that I’m not denying that some animals–dogs, elephants, etc–have communities of their own; obviously some do.) If you live in a community, if you partake of the advantages that society imparts, then you take on an obligation to act as a neighbor. If you see a helpless human creature in jeopardy, then it behooves you to intervene; it behooves you to place higher priority on that human life than on that of an animal.
That’s the rational part of my argument, I’ll add this. There are persons who don’t agree with the above, of course, who feel no obligation to assist their neighbors when they are in jeopardy or need. There’s something the fuck wrong with those people. Maybe it’s genetic and they simply lack the hardwiring; maybe they’ve been traumatized and need help; maybe they’re just assholes. But they’re not right in the head.
I don’t like babies much. But I’d still save the baby over the panda. Bonus if I could hand it off to its parents immediately, because while I’d save it, I’d really rather not have to take care of it for very long.
Ditto. And in the deepest corners of my heart, I would probably enjoy the thought of the human baby drowning after all with such neglectful parents the odds of him or her growing up to be a menace to other humans were rather high.
The problem is people who choose to breed irresponsibly have already broken that social contract. They have placed their own desire to reproduce above what the community needs. Therefore, they shouldn’t be surprised when the community kicks them out and lets them suffer the results of their stupidity (like creating conditions that lead to the extinction of animal species and leaving babies unattended).
I would feel less threatened by someone raised by wolves than by someone raised by you.
And now the thread is complete.