Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Would you be okay with being the pet of a member of a species with superior intelligence?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Someone pointed out to me that if the criteria was intellegent, as in they're more intellegent, it's not much different from someone keeping a mentally retarded human as a pet...which wouldn't be cool with me at all.
What I said is that it's our god-given right to be on top on the galactic food chain.
The fact that you cannot even support your own species is disturbing.
^You still said enslaved everything else, and last I checked, Slavery is slavery.
It is when you're a sentient being that knows you're a pet.
I have my opinion.
But apparently it's a heinous crime to hold a different opinion.
It's about YOU, whether YOU would allow a completely subjective and non-specified race of species to keep YOU as a pet.
YOU.
YOU.
You.
AKA, YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
YOU.
There, now maybe you would get the fucking point already and cease with this fucktarded campaign?
I would be fine with being owned as a pet, if it meant that I didn't have to pay for anything anymore. Getting internet, clothing, food and toys for free as a trade off for being a pet of a different race wouldn't be so bad.
Since they have superior intelligence, I doubt they would not know how to communicate with me.
Okay.
Then I say "no".
"A given owner might not want to do so, but thing is, they still can. And that is very, very scary."
Yes, you're right, an owner can do this, but from as far I can tell, increasing in intelligence hasn't increased a species chances to violently kill something for no reason.
"Anyway, for this one the main trouble is that she cannot imagine (not
saying that it is impossible. Only that this one cannot think of it) a
being that is as intellectually superior to human as human is to cat."
That's alright, at least you're presenting your counter-argument from a rational standpoint,
It's more a matter of respect. I'm sure the hypothetical aliens would pamper us, and I'd be damn tempted to go along with it and be able to spend my days in luxury. But the issues are probably deeper then that. I'm not saying humans are the best thing ever, because that's damn self centered.
saying that it is impossible. Only that this one cannot think of it) a
being that is as intellectually superior to human as human is to cat."
You know, other people are getting my argument across much better...
The reason that pets eat out of pet bowls is because they can't eat at the dinner table, they literally can not do that, Mentally speaking.
You're still of the mentality that they these aliens would treat us as how we treat pets currently,
which doesn't even fit with the Criteria in the Op.
"It does not necessarily decrease it, either, and look at how many humans mistreat their pets >_>"
Name one animal that's become more violent due to increased intelligence (and before you say Humans or (insert intelligent species here, I want you to prove they were less barbaric when they were still in caves and huts)
as for Humans mistreating their pets, well, considering the OP's criteria is a Benevolent race that's higher on the IQ scale then us, I would hope* that they're a little better than that
They still wouldn't respect us, and if someone didn't respect my older sister because she can't even talk, and treated her as subhuman, I'd be angry, so I wouldn't like the idea of another species treating us like...toddlers because we're not quite AS sapient as them.
"You know, other people are getting my argument across much better..."
All this talk about disrespecting pets makes me wonder how many pet-owners there actually are in this thread.
But the gist of it is that humans CAN take care of ourselves (even if quite a few times we choose NOT to), so we don't need to be plopped into the galactic playpen.
Also, what is with this more sapient bullshit? I'm pretty sure you're either sapient or not. You probably mean more intellegent or advanced, which is a good point, but just because something had more raw intellegence then humans, it doesn't mean they're better. Very very smart beings can still be petty bastards.
Animals have been able to care for themselves for thousands of years before we took any of them as pets.
Domestication is probably the only thing to worry about in this situation, but truth is, no one has brought it up because "Omg, being treated like a pet is slavery"
~shrug~
^ All I'm saying is, if you really think that pets are treated horribly, they aren't
You have it in your mind though, that sapient pets would be treated the same as non-sapient pets, This isn't true.
The whole discussion(aside from Chagen) is how sapient-pets would be handled.
...well, I wouldn't like to be CALLED a pet, but if sapient-pets would be treated differently, why even call them that? I suppose I wouldn't mind having an alien be my patron, for example.
On another level, some people enjoy life more when they're not pampered and have to work for things, so not everyone would want to have a patron providing for their every need.
increasing in intelligence hasn't increased a species chances to
violently kill something for no reason.
True. But, as been said above, it does not increase it either. But for thins one, an actual likelihood of it happening is not that relevant. It's being permitted to do so that bothers this one.
This one would be very uncomfortable to learn that some person - say, a neighbour next door - has a legal right to kill her whenever he wishes with no consequences. Even though this one has no reason to suspect that said neighbour has any inclination to do so. Would anyone here be willing to give this one a power to do whatever she wishes to them? Even though this one does not show too many violent tendencies (or at least she hopes so)?
as
for Humans mistreating their pets, well, considering the OP's criteria
is a Benevolent race that's higher on the IQ scale then us, I would
hope* that they're a little better than that
Thing is, benevolence is unlikely to be understood correctly if intelligence levels are different enough for it to work at all. Something done "for this one's own good" might be against this one's preference. Note that it still might be a right thing to do, but it would not be something...easy to accept, on personal level. This one's pet snail does not particularly like being removed from it's container, but this one ignores it's preference. However, if this one meets a human doing something this one perceives as self-destructive, or merely thinks she has a better idea about just what would improve the human's life, she is not about to ignore their own preference.
Again, objectively speaking, it might be that whatever that benevolent race is doing is right, but in this one's opinion, they would be wrong about that. But as a pet, this one would have no say in it as pet's preference can be ignored. Right or wrong, it would be rather distressing experience for this one.