EPTI mean, this is a central reason why I don't want to have kids. But I think the same thing applies to a dog. Once you've made the decision to take it home you have an ethical requirement to do the best you can to ensure it gets what it needs, and that doesn't go away just because you are unhappy.
The LiquidLegends Lounge - Page 1762
| Forum Index > The Shopkeeper′s Inn |
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
I mean, this is a central reason why I don't want to have kids. But I think the same thing applies to a dog. Once you've made the decision to take it home you have an ethical requirement to do the best you can to ensure it gets what it needs, and that doesn't go away just because you are unhappy. | ||
|
red_
United States8474 Posts
On October 05 2017 12:29 Ketara wrote: You could apply the same logic to human children. Do parents have an obligation to continue parenting even if they're shit parents and doing a shit job and both they and the child have horrible lives as a direct result of the decision to have a child? I mean, this is a central reason why I don't want to have kids. But I think the same thing applies to a dog. Once you've made the decision to take it home you have an ethical requirement to do the best you can to ensure it gets what it needs, and that doesn't go away just because you are unhappy. I think there is an enormously fundamental difference between a human child and an animal. People can think whatever they want about me for having that opinion. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
| ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
| ||
|
red_
United States8474 Posts
I know people love animals, I won't claim to love them as much obviously but I am hardly some callous sociopath, I've taken care of animals when family members failed to and when roommates failed to and when an ex failed to because I can handle it. If that happened again with where my life is now though I couldn't handle it(much like reqs scenario it sounds like) and I'm not telling loved ones to fuck off and enjoy depression to save the dog. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
In other news I have to give a group presentation tomorrow on a philosophy paper I barely understand. Should be entertaining at least. we're getting into philosophy territory here and my brain hurts enough. but I'd say that you clearly don't have a moral responsibility to sacrifice your happiness for a dog. adopting a dog as I see it is something really good and praiseworthy but not something you in any way have a responsibility to do (in the general sense.) Now if you have a dog and he makes you miserable and you don't know whether to return him that's a decision each person kind of has to make on their own. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
And that's fine. I'm not saying he's wrong. I'm just saying how I feel about it. Growing up my stepmom ran an animal shelter out of the house. We would often have literally dozens of rescues on the property (so many I'd forget names and such), and my stepmom would do things like stop the car on the highway to pick up animals that had been hit and drive them to the hospital, or go into neighbors yards to feed and care for animals that the owners were mistreating. Interesting woman. Any animal that we couldn't find an appropriate owner for (and she conducted interviews with potential owners) got to stay with us till it passed no matter how hard to deal with it was. So I've got a lot of feelings about this particular issue. | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30775 Posts
It is far more cruel to keep a dog that you do not like and eventually end up either neglecting affection for or resenting. Someone could easily come and pick up that dog from the shelter the next day too. Obviously finding it a new home would be preferable. | ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On October 05 2017 12:55 iCanada wrote: Idk. I think a dog's life worth more than a person's feelings. Do you think a pig life is worth more than the taste of bacon? I'd rate the feelings of a person at least on the same level of importance as a taste of something good maybe you'll slam dunk me with a revelation that you are a vegetarian, but I'm pretty sure Req is not, and the only thing that is making this different is the fact that he has developed some feelings for the dog, and that he has seen the dog with his own eyes. I'm not sure if taking the dog then returning it is the same as never picking it up. If I ran a shelter and I was low on space, I'd probably needle the animals that have been returned first, because I'd imagine animals that have been returned once have a higher chance of being returned again. | ||
|
phyvo
United States5635 Posts
I remember one designer saying in an interview that they wanted a hearthstone to be a game where once one player does their "thing" the game ends. Well, I think they got it, and I think it feels really stupid. | ||
|
killerdog
Denmark6522 Posts
Poll: Which would you do Send dog you've had for a few weeks back to shelter (11) Get divorced (1) 12 total votes Your vote: Which would you do (Vote): Send dog you've had for a few weeks back to shelter + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On October 05 2017 22:43 phyvo wrote: Completely unrelated to this discussion, I decided to quit hearthstone. My joke decks just suck too much these days and it's not fun playing a game where the limits on how many cards you can put into a deck don't really matter because it's actually really easy to cheat out big dudes or pick third/fourth flamestrikes or blizzards with glyph. The outcome RNG doesn't help either, I actually had a warlock play vorax and get dinosize off of ungoro pack... I remember one designer saying in an interview that they wanted a hearthstone to be a game where once one player does their "thing" the game ends. Well, I think they got it, and I think it feels really stupid. It mostly stems from Hearthstones inate inability to interact with your opponent. There's only one axis the designers allow you to interact with so it always feels a bit helpless. Magic only really gets to that point where neither player wants to bother with interacting but that's pretty rare. It's a study in some weird game design honestly. The concept of "feelsbadman" when it relates to being disrupted in your gameplan is more important than the "feelsbadman" when you can do nothing to stop your opponent. Super weird. Also when standard was first announced people were heralding it as the saviour of the game but a few did mention how much more expensive and time consuming it'll become as a result of it. I'm surprised you lasted so long before the burnout hit honestly. It's just not a game experience made to be played continually. | ||
AsmodeusXI
United States15536 Posts
On October 05 2017 22:43 phyvo wrote: Completely unrelated to this discussion, I decided to quit hearthstone. My joke decks just suck too much these days and it's not fun playing a game where the limits on how many cards you can put into a deck don't really matter because it's actually really easy to cheat out big dudes or pick third/fourth flamestrikes or blizzards with glyph. The outcome RNG doesn't help either, I actually had a warlock play vorax and get dinosize off of ungoro pack... I remember one designer saying in an interview that they wanted a hearthstone to be a game where once one player does their "thing" the game ends. Well, I think they got it, and I think it feels really stupid. Sorry you've gone through TWO CCGs now (did you stop playing Duelyst? I seem to remember that)? For a genre that I really enjoy in reality (MTG, Netrunner to the extent that I've played it) it really seems like CCGs have considerable burnout/frustration when they're online. But then, I suppose that TONS of people play Hearthstone still so... | ||
|
mordek
United States12705 Posts
| ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
Anyway, the shelter is a no-kill so even if we returned him it would not be a death sentence. Since our discussion, the wife has been more focused on solving dog problems rather than freaking out about them, so I think she's getting used to everything. Still seems to stress about the amount of responsibility but I think the initial shock has worn off. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
I think of the hardcore experience had more depth to explore maybe it'd be more enjoyable for that aspect to be so prevalent but even in games like that(BW,CS,LoL,Dota etc.) still have large component of players playing how they want as well as having social aspects. Just means burnout is so intense. | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
On October 05 2017 23:02 killerdog wrote: Where the heck is my Castevania option? Everything that can go wrong in this world does. | ||
|
phyvo
United States5635 Posts
On October 05 2017 23:09 Numy wrote: It mostly stems from Hearthstones inate inability to interact with your opponent. There's only one axis the designers allow you to interact with so it always feels a bit helpless. Magic only really gets to that point where neither player wants to bother with interacting but that's pretty rare. It's a study in some weird game design honestly. The concept of "feelsbadman" when it relates to being disrupted in your gameplan is more important than the "feelsbadman" when you can do nothing to stop your opponent. Super weird. Also when standard was first announced people were heralding it as the saviour of the game but a few did mention how much more expensive and time consuming it'll become as a result of it. I'm surprised you lasted so long before the burnout hit honestly. It's just not a game experience made to be played continually. Yeah, and it's kind of weird that they kill decks like worgen OTK that can be blocked by taunts but then allow things like quest mage and even print cards that support it in the next expansion. Not that worgen OTK was a good thing, but quest mage can't possibly be more healthy. For me it doesn't have too much to do with standard. I've played Hearthstone since the beta, so I have a wild collection that's plenty big. But with stuff like the naga sea witch change (which is incredibly annoying as a rogue player with no real board clear), the sharing of cards with standard (which results in them getting nerfed), and the propensity of Blizzard to release cards OP enough to get played in wild anyways, wild doesn't add much to the experience for me. On October 05 2017 23:09 AsmodeusXI wrote: Sorry you've gone through TWO CCGs now (did you stop playing Duelyst? I seem to remember that)? For a genre that I really enjoy in reality (MTG, Netrunner to the extent that I've played it) it really seems like CCGs have considerable burnout/frustration when they're online. But then, I suppose that TONS of people play Hearthstone still so... That's two CCGs now. Come to think of it I quit Duelyst for similar reasons, it's pretty much designed on the Hearthstone template and so shares the same issues with interactivity. I suppose CCGs burning people out is one theory but I'm willing to admit that maybe me and CCGs just don't mix well except in a very casual setting. I'm not sure MTG would be any better. Definitely not online at least. | ||
|
killerdog
Denmark6522 Posts
On October 06 2017 00:07 Alaric wrote: Where the heck is my Castevania option? Everything that can go wrong in this world does. This is srs bsns alaric... We can't have joke options stealing votes and potentially ruining the scientific integrity of the poll + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31495 Posts
On October 05 2017 23:02 killerdog wrote: This is bigger than req now. Poll: Which would you do Send dog you've had for a few weeks back to shelter (11) Get divorced (1) 12 total votes Your vote: Which would you do (Vote): Send dog you've had for a few weeks back to shelter + Show Spoiler + No Castlevania option Did not vote | ||
| ||
