In the first session of the module Being Bad, we had to write down the worst thing we had done on a piece of paper and put it in a hat. After being split into tiny groups, we randomly chose two to three papers and discussed if they were bad. But the most interesting part of the session was at the end. We chose two of the worst confessions and debated on which was worse. Firstly, was drugging the neighbour’s dog, which resulted in its death and then denying knowing anything about it. Secondly, was a blind mother falling down the stairs and instead of helping her up, the confessor said “mum, you’re an embarrassment”.
Personally, I felt that the former confession was worse for the following reasons. Firstly, the dog can’t object to having the drugs being injected into it. If one drugged another human without their consent, there would be uproar about the shocking immorality of it. At the end of the day, the dog was still a breathing, living creature. However, one could argue, “would we think twice if we killed a spider?”. I personally do, for I believe that a life is a life. It is put on earth for a reason. Just because an animal can’t communicate with us, does that mean we can treat then however we like without second thought? Factors such as intelligence, ability to communicate or size should not determine superiority over another who lacks these. It shouldn’t give the one who has these factors the right to do what they please to the other.
Secondly, the dog was someone else’s property, bought up and bred by that person. By murdering it, it shows no concern for the neighbour, who could have been attached to it. Yet one can argue that there’s no proof to show that the neighbour was attached. As someone argued in class, “Its just a dog. At the end of the day, you can buy yourself another dog, but you can’t buy yourself another mother”. This is true, but it wasn’t as if the second confessor had killed their mother. There may have been a reason why the confessor said what they said. Children are an example of their parents’ parenting skills. It would have been down to the mother’s upbringing of that person that caused them to say what they said. As Ronald L. Pitzer, Extension Family Sociologist demonstrates, “Children learn more than social skills and table manners from their parents”. http://www.extension.umn.edu/specializations/youthdevelopment/components/6141-19.html
Personally, I felt that the former confession was worse for the following reasons. Firstly, the dog can’t object to having the drugs being injected into it. If one drugged another human without their consent, there would be uproar about the shocking immorality of it. At the end of the day, the dog was still a breathing, living creature. However, one could argue, “would we think twice if we killed a spider?”. I personally do, for I believe that a life is a life. It is put on earth for a reason. Just because an animal can’t communicate with us, does that mean we can treat then however we like without second thought? Factors such as intelligence, ability to communicate or size should not determine superiority over another who lacks these. It shouldn’t give the one who has these factors the right to do what they please to the other.
Secondly, the dog was someone else’s property, bought up and bred by that person. By murdering it, it shows no concern for the neighbour, who could have been attached to it. Yet one can argue that there’s no proof to show that the neighbour was attached. As someone argued in class, “Its just a dog. At the end of the day, you can buy yourself another dog, but you can’t buy yourself another mother”. This is true, but it wasn’t as if the second confessor had killed their mother. There may have been a reason why the confessor said what they said. Children are an example of their parents’ parenting skills. It would have been down to the mother’s upbringing of that person that caused them to say what they said. As Ronald L. Pitzer, Extension Family Sociologist demonstrates, “Children learn more than social skills and table manners from their parents”. http://www.extension.umn.edu/specializations/youthdevelopment/components/6141-19.html
Another in class argued that a mother is the one who had bought you up and took care of you when you were sick. However, as Mark Jones had pointed out, just because one is a mother, does that mean she is a good mother? There’s no evidence to prove that mother was a good mother. If she was, than yes what was said was bad. But comments like that can easily be brushed away. At the end of the day, it’s just words. There are worse things that could be said. But going back to the point, the neighbour obviously had the dog for a reason, be it for company, guidance or what other. One wouldn’t have one if they didn’t want it and they certainly wouldn’t keep it if they had no concern for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment