A huge fire is burning outside the Louvre; the world’s media is watching you, along with an enormous crowd who are in tumultuous disagreement with each other.

You have a choice to make:

You can either throw the world’s most famous painting, the Mona Lisa by Leonardo, on the fire, or you can save it by instead throwing a live animal, a sick stray dog with less than a year of natural life left, in to the flames instead (the dog is fully aware and has its senses about it).

Do you save one of humanities greatest cultural treasures, revered and loved for centuries, or do you save the poor pooch from the agonies of the fire?

(I would save the dog and burn the picture; what about you?)

I'd piss on the fire.

There definitely isn't a red capped American tourist available in this scenario?

Ok. The painting. Can't throw a creature that suffers into a fire.

Save the dog.

Dog.

Why do you want to know?

1.) Why do I have to throw the world’s most famous painting, the Mona Lisa by Leonardo de whatshisname on the fire?

2.) How would throwing a live animal, a fully aware, sick, stray dog with its senses about it and less than a year of natural life left, in to the flames save the painting?

3.) Why is there no option to throw both on the fire?

4.) Can we have the option of either throwing the painting or, assuming we can throw 145 kilograms of lard, you on the fire?

Anyway, if there's a bonfire outside the Louvre and priceless treasures are lying around in the streets then there's probably zombies.

All bets are off with zombies.

Dog.

ETA Sorry it’s a negative question. Burn the Mona Lisa, save the dog.

Throw one of them on the fire?

A better scenario would be that you have broken an arm and have time to get out carrying one thing only, an injured dog or a painting.

Hand me that dog.
In the grand scheme of things it makes no sense in terms of relative value to the future, but those of us who are not psycopaths are hard-wired to value life above nearly everything else.

Edit - make that intelligent life, I doubt anyone would stop on the way out to save a rat, insect, or many other forms of life that we consider less significant than an animal we socially bond with.

what if it was a chicken instead of a dog?

Hmm, how can I tie this in with woodchucks...
I'd burn the painting, because The Ghost of Mr. Woodchuckles sees all, and has a trade deal worked out with The Mysterious God of Dogs, where each other's followers will support each other in the Earthly realm. Many dogs aren't really holding up their end of the deal, as they continue to chase after woodchucks and other squirrels, but those individuals will be damned to an eternity of watching the mailman climb up and down their steps while they're locked inside and unable to jump on him or her.

Definitely save the dog. Then adopt the dog, take it to the vet, and let it live out it's life in comfort, getting walkies every day and playing chase the ball.

Would I burn the Mona Lisa or a dog?
No.

Move this thread to "The Arts & Entertainment"? It'll fit like a glove on hand. The Mona Lisa is a piece of art and Devogue started this thread for his own entertainment.

A stupid scenario.

zulumoose wrote:Throw one of them on the fire?

A better scenario would be that you have broken an arm and have time to get out carrying one thing only, an injured dog or a painting.

Hand me that dog.
In the grand scheme of things it makes no sense in terms of relative value to the future, but those of us who are not psycopaths are hard-wired to value life above nearly everything else.

Edit - make that intelligent life, I doubt anyone would stop on the way out to save a rat, insect, or many other forms of life that we consider less significant than an animal we socially bond with.

Your last sentence is interesting - okay, so switch the scenario to a choice between the Mona Lisa and a perfectly healthy rat...

Harder to catch a rat than a dog. Is the rat injured? Because healthy rats are notoriously good at leaving sinking ships.

Just going to add this, about the value of rats:
https://www.theguardian.com/global-deve ... -landmines

PPS: Seriously, please watch this video, or another about landmine sniffing rats. Rats are quite adorable, and they save lives.

Who the hell would kill an animal for a picture?

Hermit wrote:4.) Can we have the option of either throwing the painting or, assuming we can throw 145 kilograms of lard, you on the fire?

Thanks for that.

Hermit wrote:Move this thread to "The Arts & Entertainment"? It'll fit like a glove on hand. The Mona Lisa is a piece of art and Devogue started this thread for his own entertainment.

I started it to see if there is any circumstance in which a lifeless object would have more value than a living creature. Perhaps my scenario is crude and ill thought out, but I hope that others will adjust it to something more thoughtful.