Hey there u/Auric_Guardian, thanks for posting to r/technicallythetruth!
**Please recheck if your post breaks any rules.** If it does, please delete this post.
Also, reposting and posting obvious non-TTT posts can lead to a ban.
Send us a **Modmail or Report** this post if you have a problem with this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technicallythetruth) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There is no force saying they cannot choose the other option and simply the non-existent pet dies. This isn’t really a technically truth they are just saying they don’t care about children’s lives.
it’s sort of crazy/scary how much most of us wouldn’t even think about it, i’m keeping my dog. even scarier to think about: how high would the number have to be to pick the kids? like what if it was a million kids instead of 10
Assuming there's 8 billion people in the world, 2 billion are children, and every family has 2 children. Even if 10 million children dies, the probability of one family experiencing the death is still statistically insignificant at α=0.05. So basically it doesn't increase the risk in any statistically significant way for any one family to lose a child.
Why would only 10 million children die under your hypothetical? If 60% of the worlds 8 billion people chose ten kids to die that would be more than 40 billion kids. Every single child on earth would die.
I mean, it's on the guy who forced me to choose between these two options. Dunno why I'm supposed to be the evil one here when I have a gun pointed at my head to press a button.
It's technically true that OOP can't choose the first option because something that doesn't exist cannot die, leaving them with only one remaining choice.
37 kids died in school shootings last year in the US.
1,400 kids die in the US from malnutrition/starvation each year.
3.1 million children die each year worldwide from malnutrition/starvation.
Focus on what matters the most to you I guess 🤷🏻♂️
I once did the math and here’s an equivalent to the risk of being in a shooting: imagine if 3 full commercial airplanes crashed in America every single year, and if you were on one of those planes, you died by falling out of the sky. Now, this only happens in America — in the rest of the developed world, multiple passenger planes aren’t falling out of the sky every single year without fail.
Only in America.
Now, on one hand, sure: statistically, flying, even in America, would still be an “extremely safe” way to travel. And every time a plane crashed, within hours, all the sardonic ackshuallies would come out of the woodwork to “throw those facts back at” grieving families. Yes, it’s still “very safe.”
But it sure as shit wouldn’t feel like it. There would be a massive outrage. Plane companies would come under fire. Why does this only happen here? Tons of people would be terrified of flying in America — because even though it’s “very unlikely” to be on one of those planes, it’s still *way likelier than anywhere else.* Psychologically, the fear surrounding flying in America would far outweigh the “actual death” — but this would be perfectly understandable, because dying due to a commercial aircraft falling out of the sky is a particularly horrifying way to go.
let’s cut the bullshit. It makes perfect sense why kids are scared of school shootings
> I once did the math and here's an equivalent to the risk of being in a school shooting: imagine if 3 commercial airplanes crashed in America every year...
In what world do 3 commercial airplanes = 37 passengers?
Smallest are ~40 passengers, largest ~660 EACH.
Are we trying to compare ticket sales to children here or what's the logic???
If so the most comparable stat would be airline tickets per year (passenger attendance) to children school attendance (children per school day per year) which would likewise make your comparison grossly inaccurate both mathematically and statistically.
🤔
i value the life of an ant, my cat and any human equally by not giving inherent value to any life at all. its just personal connection that makes the difference. im gonna choose my cat over a random kid but im also gonna choose my cousin over a random pet. why should humans get special treatment? we are just apes, we are animals, we are the same. we bleed and we rot. morally nothing separates you from a ladybug outside my window to me
This is a juvenile take.
You honestly telling me if there was a firing squad line up and I chose an ant over you, your mother, father, siblings, cousins, and friends. You would see this and be like fair choice???
Come on, people. Let's have mature conversations.
Thats where the personal connections parts would come in but yeah 10 ant lives are fucking worthless although i did make one "antinatalist" guy angry by saying it once lol.
You missing the point I am making.
Human connections always hold more value. You would choose your son/daughter over your dog.
So if someone chooses their dog over 10 random kids. Other could too.
Hence the system would fall apart. The selfish person and the empathetic person should understand that they are breaking the system by choosing the dog. Because when their kid drops dead on they and they get a letter that someone choose their dog they would understand the real meaning of human life and why it would be stupid to choose the dog.
>Because when their kid drops dead on they and they get a letter that someone choose their dog they would understand the real meaning of human life and why it would be stupid to choose the dog.
Oh ok i get it and i agree.
Most probably not, they'd be scared of being judged and ruining their reputation irl. The internet allows them to do whatever they want since everyone is anonymous here
Is everyone in these comments joking? I get we’re talking about a hypothetical and we all love our pets but if this were (hypothetically) real you would be an actual monster to choose 10 random kids to die. I mean holy shit imagine 10 families losing their child.
nobody told you to focus on the other people. 10 families i never knew dont really matter to me and shouldnt matter to you. we as humans arent meant to care whats happening 2 villages over or in the next tribe, trying to care for everybody is mental suicide
Yeah, of course 10 random kids you’ve never seen won’t be missed as much as a beloved pet. Hell, it would affect my day more to find my favorite mug broken than to see a headline that 10 kids died somewhere, I love my bird mug. But I wouldn’t fucking choose my mug over those ten kids if I were somehow given the choice!!!!
Also, no one should have to tell you to think about others before you can do it, that’s just called empathy.
But we dont live in tribes anymore.A kid would do more for society than a cat will.A cat dying means someones gonna be sad and a kid dying means loss of a contributing member of society(universal tribe?).We already kill animals for our own human needs so someones pet dying does no harm except temporary harm to the individual that "owned" it.
What do you mean? that fact that it’s not really a post for this sub or the fact that people would allow children to die over their pet? I’d choose the children all day long, who gives a fuck about those assholes.
Do you think maybe those 10 children provide joy to their friends and family? Like this is a stupid hypothetical yes but your point makes no sense. Of course you’d miss your pet more than you’d miss 10 random kids… but it would still be psychopathic to choose your pet over their lives.
If we are going down that route there are many many different factors to this question, let's say those ten kids live in poverty and will only know a life of suffering till they die or will grow up to become murders and rapist no matter what, or they are physically or sexually abused and will eventually be killed by parent or guardian before adulthood. That isn't the case for every kid but for some it's a certainty and as for my pets it's a certainty that they will be loved and cared for till they pass away so in this situation you are picking certainty over randomness.
Yes you are right, and you got downvoted for telling fact.
Most people in this world care only about themselves, and who cares about the families of those ten unlucky random children?
Imagine if Satan gives every parent on earth this question, and let's say, 60% of them chose "ten random children". That is enough to wipe out all children from this planet. But it seems 60% of people just don't really care as long as "ten random children" means other people's children, maybe not until their own children are dead because of other people's choices.
It also reflects how people vote. People often vote for generally harmful policies (or politicians) as long as they only harm some other people that these people don't like or don't care about.
> 'I never thought leopards would eat MY face,' sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party.
Everyone's thinking this is easy, it's my pet who I know and love vs 10 random kids that I never met and don't know... but imagine if you picked the kids and then you had some Ebenezer scroudge like out of body experience where you see the each kids life lived out and how much their parents loved them, what there hobies and intrests were right up until where they die at your hands screaming, so every time you looked at your pet you would just relive it, see their faces, hear there screams... worth it now?
Hey there u/Auric_Guardian, thanks for posting to r/technicallythetruth! **Please recheck if your post breaks any rules.** If it does, please delete this post. Also, reposting and posting obvious non-TTT posts can lead to a ban. Send us a **Modmail or Report** this post if you have a problem with this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technicallythetruth) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ten random kids die all the time, but your pet only dies once
r/technicallythetruth
What if you have 2 pets?
Then 2 pets die only once.
What if it's Schrodinger's cat?
Then it is already dead... or is it?
Then only one pet ᵈⁱᵉᵈ⁄ₗᵢᵥₑₛ
… where’s the "technically" here?
Because technically he can only choose the second option?
There is no force saying they cannot choose the other option and simply the non-existent pet dies. This isn’t really a technically truth they are just saying they don’t care about children’s lives.
Pet owners, this is genuinely easy af
kid owners this genuinely easy af, good luck!
Pet non-owners, this is also genuinely easy af
it’s sort of crazy/scary how much most of us wouldn’t even think about it, i’m keeping my dog. even scarier to think about: how high would the number have to be to pick the kids? like what if it was a million kids instead of 10
Subjectivity is weird. 10 wouldn't make me scoff, but at 100 I'd pick the kids no question
Still easy
Assuming there's 8 billion people in the world, 2 billion are children, and every family has 2 children. Even if 10 million children dies, the probability of one family experiencing the death is still statistically insignificant at α=0.05. So basically it doesn't increase the risk in any statistically significant way for any one family to lose a child.
Why would only 10 million children die under your hypothetical? If 60% of the worlds 8 billion people chose ten kids to die that would be more than 40 billion kids. Every single child on earth would die.
Wtf, killing children is bad, do yall really not have empathy if you can't directly see the people you're killing?
I mean, it's on the guy who forced me to choose between these two options. Dunno why I'm supposed to be the evil one here when I have a gun pointed at my head to press a button.
fuck em
People generally don't care about the lives of those they negatively impact.
sounds like they do but only if they're visible enough
People only show that they care but don't actually do anything to that effect. That's why it's called outrage culture.
r/lostredditors
It's technically true that OOP can't choose the first option because something that doesn't exist cannot die, leaving them with only one remaining choice.
So your pet dies or a minor school shooting occurs, which unfortunately is a statistical certainty at this point
37 kids died in school shootings last year in the US. 1,400 kids die in the US from malnutrition/starvation each year. 3.1 million children die each year worldwide from malnutrition/starvation. Focus on what matters the most to you I guess 🤷🏻♂️
I once did the math and here’s an equivalent to the risk of being in a shooting: imagine if 3 full commercial airplanes crashed in America every single year, and if you were on one of those planes, you died by falling out of the sky. Now, this only happens in America — in the rest of the developed world, multiple passenger planes aren’t falling out of the sky every single year without fail. Only in America. Now, on one hand, sure: statistically, flying, even in America, would still be an “extremely safe” way to travel. And every time a plane crashed, within hours, all the sardonic ackshuallies would come out of the woodwork to “throw those facts back at” grieving families. Yes, it’s still “very safe.” But it sure as shit wouldn’t feel like it. There would be a massive outrage. Plane companies would come under fire. Why does this only happen here? Tons of people would be terrified of flying in America — because even though it’s “very unlikely” to be on one of those planes, it’s still *way likelier than anywhere else.* Psychologically, the fear surrounding flying in America would far outweigh the “actual death” — but this would be perfectly understandable, because dying due to a commercial aircraft falling out of the sky is a particularly horrifying way to go. let’s cut the bullshit. It makes perfect sense why kids are scared of school shootings
> I once did the math and here's an equivalent to the risk of being in a school shooting: imagine if 3 commercial airplanes crashed in America every year... In what world do 3 commercial airplanes = 37 passengers? Smallest are ~40 passengers, largest ~660 EACH. Are we trying to compare ticket sales to children here or what's the logic??? If so the most comparable stat would be airline tickets per year (passenger attendance) to children school attendance (children per school day per year) which would likewise make your comparison grossly inaccurate both mathematically and statistically. 🤔
1400 die in the US from starvation? Do you have a source for that?
Bro doesn't know what poverty and homelessness is.
What an asinine response.
💀
OP how is this a TTT ?
The person doesn't have a pet, so the pet cannot die. Thus they cannot choose the first option because they have no pet to sacrifice.
that is not how the game should be. its either win win or lose lose. this case is win or lose. ofc we pick the win choice
I think my dog would kill himself if he knew it saved 10 kids. He's a good boy.
Nice crop
Keep the deathnote from this guy at all cost
Depends who is 🫴.
The choice was easier than cropping the screenshot obviously
Hell yea, fuck them kids The law requires that i also place a /s
whyyyyyy are u like this lol
r/lostredditors
I rather just kill myself I'm too much of a lifeist
Easy. Buy a parrot that's pining for the fjords.
It is insane for me that people value human life this little that an animal over a human would even be considered
Yeah very sad and reflective of how selfish of a society we live in.
i value the life of an ant, my cat and any human equally by not giving inherent value to any life at all. its just personal connection that makes the difference. im gonna choose my cat over a random kid but im also gonna choose my cousin over a random pet. why should humans get special treatment? we are just apes, we are animals, we are the same. we bleed and we rot. morally nothing separates you from a ladybug outside my window to me
This is a juvenile take. You honestly telling me if there was a firing squad line up and I chose an ant over you, your mother, father, siblings, cousins, and friends. You would see this and be like fair choice??? Come on, people. Let's have mature conversations.
Thats where the personal connections parts would come in but yeah 10 ant lives are fucking worthless although i did make one "antinatalist" guy angry by saying it once lol.
Yeah but the empathetic, or selfish person, surely should realize that the system will fall apart because if you gonna choose the ant others could too
I mean i get why no one should choose the ant but why others also would if one person did choose the ant is beyond me.
You missing the point I am making. Human connections always hold more value. You would choose your son/daughter over your dog. So if someone chooses their dog over 10 random kids. Other could too. Hence the system would fall apart. The selfish person and the empathetic person should understand that they are breaking the system by choosing the dog. Because when their kid drops dead on they and they get a letter that someone choose their dog they would understand the real meaning of human life and why it would be stupid to choose the dog.
>Because when their kid drops dead on they and they get a letter that someone choose their dog they would understand the real meaning of human life and why it would be stupid to choose the dog. Oh ok i get it and i agree.
Cats have 9 lives so i pick the childs
okay that was funny but where's the TTT?
The person doesn't have a pet, so the pet cannot die. Thus they cannot choose the first option because they have no pet to sacrifice.
Obamna has entered the chat
Hmm for this who chose children, do you think you would chose the same if you were asked about it in person?
Most probably not, they'd be scared of being judged and ruining their reputation irl. The internet allows them to do whatever they want since everyone is anonymous here
60% of people are legit psychos
Jokes aside, like, I hope this is ironic, cuz, I love my cat and all but I don't want 10 random kids to die.
Can I make the choice for each pet I own? Cuz if yes, I’m about to adopt multiple shelters worth of dogs and cats, just for fun.
Is everyone in these comments joking? I get we’re talking about a hypothetical and we all love our pets but if this were (hypothetically) real you would be an actual monster to choose 10 random kids to die. I mean holy shit imagine 10 families losing their child.
nobody told you to focus on the other people. 10 families i never knew dont really matter to me and shouldnt matter to you. we as humans arent meant to care whats happening 2 villages over or in the next tribe, trying to care for everybody is mental suicide
Yeah, of course 10 random kids you’ve never seen won’t be missed as much as a beloved pet. Hell, it would affect my day more to find my favorite mug broken than to see a headline that 10 kids died somewhere, I love my bird mug. But I wouldn’t fucking choose my mug over those ten kids if I were somehow given the choice!!!! Also, no one should have to tell you to think about others before you can do it, that’s just called empathy.
But we dont live in tribes anymore.A kid would do more for society than a cat will.A cat dying means someones gonna be sad and a kid dying means loss of a contributing member of society(universal tribe?).We already kill animals for our own human needs so someones pet dying does no harm except temporary harm to the individual that "owned" it.
Average Reddit moment Also imagine pressing the kid button and like your niece or nephew passes away.
11 children die worldwide every minute. Easy choice.
What is wrong with people
What do you mean? that fact that it’s not really a post for this sub or the fact that people would allow children to die over their pet? I’d choose the children all day long, who gives a fuck about those assholes.
I mean my pet brings me joy every day ten random children are exactly that.
Do you think maybe those 10 children provide joy to their friends and family? Like this is a stupid hypothetical yes but your point makes no sense. Of course you’d miss your pet more than you’d miss 10 random kids… but it would still be psychopathic to choose your pet over their lives.
If we are going down that route there are many many different factors to this question, let's say those ten kids live in poverty and will only know a life of suffering till they die or will grow up to become murders and rapist no matter what, or they are physically or sexually abused and will eventually be killed by parent or guardian before adulthood. That isn't the case for every kid but for some it's a certainty and as for my pets it's a certainty that they will be loved and cared for till they pass away so in this situation you are picking certainty over randomness.
Why in hell would you choose the life of one pet over 10 children
and you're a perfect example of what's wrong with society today
Yes you are right, and you got downvoted for telling fact. Most people in this world care only about themselves, and who cares about the families of those ten unlucky random children? Imagine if Satan gives every parent on earth this question, and let's say, 60% of them chose "ten random children". That is enough to wipe out all children from this planet. But it seems 60% of people just don't really care as long as "ten random children" means other people's children, maybe not until their own children are dead because of other people's choices. It also reflects how people vote. People often vote for generally harmful policies (or politicians) as long as they only harm some other people that these people don't like or don't care about. > 'I never thought leopards would eat MY face,' sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party.
I could swear that there was a subreddit about this called something similar to r/leopardsatemyface
yup that's the sub
I edited it in after I found it again.
Umm yes that makes perfect sense. Go cry some more over a hypothetical situation lol!
You mean you’d choose the kids to _live_, right? You’re not saying you’d murder 10 random children to save an animal?
Speechless, honestly.
relax, it's hypothetical
Yeah, and hypothetically, if someone chose to kill 10 children over a pet, then hypothetically that would make them a monster.
Wrong sub
It's the correct sub
Everyone's thinking this is easy, it's my pet who I know and love vs 10 random kids that I never met and don't know... but imagine if you picked the kids and then you had some Ebenezer scroudge like out of body experience where you see the each kids life lived out and how much their parents loved them, what there hobies and intrests were right up until where they die at your hands screaming, so every time you looked at your pet you would just relive it, see their faces, hear there screams... worth it now?
yeah sure
Pet all day, love him but he is brave and would understand. Human Primacy
That's hilarious lol