Thread: Would you run over a human to dodge a cat?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Not an option!

Well, I guess I'll allow one exception, and it goes to you. :bravo:

I'd run over a cat to dodge a duck...

I'd run over a cliff to dodge a pine tree.

I don't think anyone has decided that they would hit the person (thank Christ:p). And I don't think anyone will either - it's obvious that a person wouldn't kill a fellow human being to save the life of an animal that has far less reason to be alive.

Originally Posted by fae_shadow

I would proably freak out and hit the breaks, skid to the side, and end up killing all 3 of us...

Indeed...

I really hate bumping old threads, but I think this was necessary to bring to light.

Click

I hate participating in graverobbing, but

why did you feel this was necessary?

It's not news - look at the date - so it's just something you've happened across now.

This is a well known question. I'm sure people have done this in real life, before 2005.

The reference I'm familiar is from an author, at least several decades ago. Paraphrase from my impoverished memory: swerving onto the pavement to avoid a cat is sentimental; swerving into a pedestrian to avoid hitting a cat is sentimentality".

Maybe more accurate to say you'd like to talk about this again now? - than the impression I got from the post of this being new evidence requiring everyone to rethink their position on murdering innocent little kitty-cats?

I guess you can tell I hate this thread :-).

Originally Posted by ExoByte

I really hate bumping old threads, but I think this was necessary to bring to light.

Click

Thanks. There are people out there who think like that. Obviously there are different perspectives on the issue. Most of the people in this thread choose the human over the cat, but there are different reasons why, and that is mainly what I wanted the discussion to be about. I hope I dont' see any more whining over the fact that I asked the question.

Originally Posted by sourcejedi

I hate participating in graverobbing, but

why did you feel this was necessary?

Speak of the devil. Look... You don't like this thread, and you don't like the issue it is about. So why are you here? You don't have to talk about this. Go find a discussion that makes you happy.

I guess it would depend on their relative ugliness. I'd run down a mangy cat with rabies and no tail or ears and a really nasty overbite over a nice looking person, but I'd pick the mangy cat over TheExile.

Originally Posted by sourcejedi

I hate participating in graverobbing, but

why did you feel this was necessary?

It's not news - look at the date - so it's just something you've happened across now.

This is a well known question. I'm sure people have done this in real life, before 2005.

The reference I'm familiar is from an author, at least several decades ago. Paraphrase from my impoverished memory: swerving onto the pavement to avoid a cat is sentimental; swerving into a pedestrian to avoid hitting a cat is sentimentality".

Maybe more accurate to say you'd like to talk about this again now? - than the impression I got from the post of this being new evidence requiring everyone to rethink their position on murdering innocent little kitty-cats?

I guess you can tell I hate this thread :-).

Thats retarded logic. Thats like saying an information is useless because its from a year or two ago. Is that what you're implying?

Why did I feel it was necessary? Because it contributed to the discussion by offering an actual situation where this question came into play. It was actually a contribution unlike a lot of your post which consists of bad mouthing mine.

If you hate this thread so much why bother participating? Just so that you can bitch about participating?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Thanks. There are people out there who think like that. Obviously there are different perspectives on the issue. Most of the people in this thread choose the human over the cat, but there are different reasons why, and that is mainly what I wanted the discussion to be about. I hope I dont' see any more whining over the fact that I asked the question.

I have reread your initial post and agree that if people did what you had asked them to, the discussion would have been mainly about alternative reasons. Please let me explain why people started whining.

* You started by explaining dodobirds statement, "that the stupidest thing he has EVER heard a person say". That's "stupid" and EVER in caps.
* You said "I didn't want to argue about it in that forum" - so maybe you want to have an argument here.
* The quoted statement compares of human and cat life using the word "inferior".
* You ask people to make a choice between ending two different lives.
* You quote dodobird as saying it's stupid to say cats are inferior, and presenting a scenario where we expect dodobird would choose to save the cat over the human. In many cases, that sort of combination would be used as a direct counterargument to dodobirds position. So it looks like you might be asking dodobird to admit that he does consider cats inferior to humans.
* You end by asking people to follow your instructions as to how the discussion should work.

That first post had very good intentions, but it included individual words, common phrases and forms which are often used without such good intentions. Even individual words can have strong associations regardless of the wider context they were employed in.

It was an emotional minefield. It stirred up very strong emotion in myself, and presumably others who criticised you. And I don't even feel that cats are equal or superior to humans in any way; I only saw it as a strong attack on a position I can have sympathy for, and it still riled me bad.

Humans aren't rational animals. They're rationalising animals. Those emotions made it very difficult to follow your instructions for rational debate.

You have to work with the human condition. I consider myself borderline Aspergers (mild autism), and of late excessively rational and detached. But I'm far less different to the people around me than I am similar to them; I'm _still_ affected by all the same emotions which override the single train of thought that is rationality, and I definitely have to allow for other peoples emotions to get along.

If you were trying to get people you disagreed with to respond in a rational way, I think you made a mistake. Equally, the "whiners" who responded emotionally made a mistake. I can't make a fair comparison because I've no more time to go compare what exactly provoked this thread, and how exactly your detractors responded to it.

I can say I thought my whining was a fairly cogent explanation of the extremely negative connotations of the word inferior. I could have presented more examples of the extremely negative "inferior" gets used, but I'd probably just have ended up tripping everyones rationality thresholds again, and the real problem was not that single word but the high overall density of negative associations.

I resent "whining".

I think we've answered why Exo felt this was necessary though - obviously left both sides feeling aggrieved without any resolution.

Peace? Don't call me names and I'll won't bash the question - and I'll try to avoid letting myself go with nonsense like "kitty-cat killer" again.

I think my question was completely legitimate and inspired an interesting discussion. It looks like you might have taken major offense to the word "inferior" because such an outlook on an organism opens the door to seeing people that way in comparison to each other. If that is what you considered concerning my mentatlity, don't worry. I think all relatively innocent humans are equal. I was raised to see things that way, and it is where my emotions direct me to this day. I think cats should be treated humanely, and I have had some pet cats that I got really attached to, but I see humanity on one level and the cat world on a much lower one. That does not mean that within the human level I think every person has his or her own level of human worthiness. A human is a human, unless one is a terrorist or a rapist or something, in which case the person is on a level lower than that of the cockroach. Everybody else is equal.

Well, I've made my point here as well...but think of what would hold up in court when the judge asks you, "Now sir, why did you break every bone in that poor pedestrian's body, and put him in a near death condition when you know it's against the law, manslaughter (Sorry if that legal term is off, but you get my point), and you had the much less threatening option of pancaking that cat?"

Another thing, whether it's evil, immoral, right or wrong or whatnot, I think it's safe to say we humans run the world. Putting other's (as well as my own) ideas into more simple terms, it would not be acceptable to kill the human...for he/she is one of us...

I wouldn't swerve and hit a person instead of a cat. I've already ran over a cat, and if it was a person I would have felt a lot worse. (I dont even think I felt bad)

If it was my cat, I'd feel terrible. She's 22 years old!!! (4 years older than me holy shit)

BBBBUUUUT, I would rather run over a human than a dog. No lie. I think dogs are better than people. Think about it... They are 100% loyal and will be with you till their death. They will sacrifice their own life for you... They come and greet you all the time... They cause no harm to the earth.... They are the closest thing to "god". and dog backwards is god... therefore dogs are god.

and bro, I think you would just get vehicular homicide for killin the person... which is just a misdemeanor. (less trouble than say.... stealing a car)

So if you ever wanna kill some1.... run em over... you will only get one year in jail, tops. (usually just probation and a fine) hahaha, our legal system...

You don't do jail time if you hit a cat. It depends on the personality. If they are both pricks I would swerve and hit the human, then go back for the cat. If they were both nice I would have to hit the cat.

Originally Posted by Michael

I think dogs are better than people. Think about it... They are 100% loyal and will be with you till their death. They will sacrifice their own life for you... They come and greet you all the time... They cause no harm to the earth.... They are the closest thing to "god". and dog backwards is god... therefore dogs are god.

Dogs are a bunch of manipulative con artist bums who make humans their bitches and don't give anything in return. They just use people for their food and games, and that's why they kiss so much ass. I would swerve to hit a dog just to save a human from being suckered into being the bastard's servant.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Dogs are a bunch of manipulative con artist bums who make humans their bitches and don't give anything in return. They just use people for their food and games, and that's why they kiss so much ass. I would swerve to hit a dog just to save a human from being suckered into being the bastard's servant.

Lol. Are you serious? you previously said you have some cats, and you like them? I have a friggin 22 year old cat and I know cats are just bitches. All they want is food. The only time they give you attention is when they are hungry or want outside. And they attack you a lot, fuck that. Dogs on the other hand will greet you when you come home, bark when they are suspicious or something, and attack people breaking in (good dogs). They will actually come to you when you call their name unlike cats, and they will sleep in your room with you. You can train dogs to do lotsa things. I agree that for the most part dogs just want food and will beg all the effin time for it. I also think they have love for humans though because of how loyal they are. Cats don't do SHIT. Dogs>humans>cats

My first dog perhaps saved my life when I was around 4-5 and my mother was in the shower. Suddenly someone busted down the door right next to me and had a knife, and my dog bit the fuck out of his leg, then he ran off. there was heavy snow outside so the cops traced his footsteps and arrested him. Funny shit.

That's why I love dogs, and hate cats.

Ps: I don't think dogs have the brain power to manipulate humans, haha.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

You have to hit either the person or the cat. Which one would you hit? Why?

Wtf kind of question is that...Garfield is roadkill. Unless it was a prized cat that had run away and a million dollar reward was in it for the person who brought him home then...it's lights out Mr. homeless man (he shouldn't of rolled off of his park bench onto the street anyway)

This topic is still going. huh... I can understand it, arguing and disagreements are, well, fun.

I'd close my eyes and speed up.

Some people think it's good i can't drive yet

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Dogs are a bunch of manipulative con artist bums who make humans their bitches and don't give anything in return. They just use people for their food and games, and that's why they kiss so much ass. I would swerve to hit a dog just to save a human from being suckered into being the bastard's servant.

Dont all animals hang around for food and shelter?

Originally Posted by ExoByte

If you hate this thread so much why bother participating? Just so that you can bitch about participating?

I try not to. But everyones obviously enjoying themselves so I'll just go cry in a corner. I don't really have anything to contribute on the level of the last (counts) 8 posts. And I can't read half of them for thinking "um, UM said to imagine you're not going to get caught and jailed". I guess I should make an effort or I'll feel guilty if my reply kills the mood.

If it's a very old person, and a very young kitten, maybe the QUALY's (quality adjusted life years) balance is in favour of the kitten! Of course, this requires a very careful assessment of the life expectancy of the oldster in the split-second available, and if theres a kitten in the middle of the road it's probably going to get run over by the car behind you anyway.

Cats can have quite long lives, which is weird because the general rule is bigger things live longer, yet dogs don't live nearly as long. I think this is a clue that theres more to cats than there is on the surface...

Millions of dead Egyptian cat-worshippers can't be wrong! (This also has an interesting effect on the "I don't want to end up in jail" thing. If you ran over a cat in ancient Egypt you'd get the death penalty.)

Originally Posted by Menthol

Dont all animals hang around for food and shelter?

touché

Originally Posted by Mark75

I guess it would depend on their relative ugliness. I'd run down a mangy cat with rabies and no tail or ears and a really nasty overbite over a nice looking person, but I'd pick the mangy cat over TheExile.

lol