Testing, Testing... Welcome to the CC Family Forum REAL Personality Test!

[seoulsearch]

I would call them and tell them. Option 1 is the most moral and the most logical of all the choices on the basis of Duty and Integrity. It's implied that part of your duty besides just overseeing the fish is to inform the owner of something drastic happening and the death of the fish would constitute the most drastic and extreme thing that could happen. This option is the most uncomfortable for you, but it is also the most honest and gives the owner the truth as soon as possible. Thus your integrity to the owner is maintained by telling the owner the truth promptly and this gives the owner the most options of how they want to emotionally handle the death of the fish as well as the terms of your duty based upon the new information (the death of the fish.)

By comparison to the other options; option 2 sounds well-intentioned but is subtly deceptive. In other words by waiting for them to return you're trying to deceive them so you can ostensibly make the full amount of money for working the full week rather than just partially or risk being terminated and unpaid totally. It is also emotionally manipulative since it's really more about mollycoddling your own ego than really caring about the feelings of the fish owner. You're not really trying to spare their feelings, you're really trying to spare your own and minimize your accountability by purposefully withholding the truth. This is the option that is both irresponsible and deceptive and thus fails both your duty as well as ruins your integrity with the owner.
3 is a good option but it's not my responsibility to buy you new fish, you have to kinda face the facts that fish are mortal. In the original scenario without plot twists it's not like I killed your fish, when you hired me there was an implicit understanding that the fish could die under my watch even if I take good care of it. The reason this fails against option 1 is if you don't tell the owner promptly then you have failed your duty which is to notify the owner promptly, but this isn't as evil as option 2 because at least you maintained your integrity by trying to offer restitution. This is the option that will be chosen by either a well-intentioned person (in case of accidental death) or a genuinely remorseful person (in the scenario they caused the fish death.) Thus this option is sound in maintaining your integrity to the owner at the minimum, and if taken in tandem with option 1 maintains both your duty and integrity, making this choice a solid runner-up with conditions based on the plot twists.
4 is definitely the fishiest option and is easily the most evil, you're actively attempting to deceive the person, and it is doubly worse in the sub-scenario that you caused the fish to die. You would be better off just confessing the truth as soon as possible (option 1) rather than jumping through elaborate hoops in an attempt to deceive the person. If you had just told them the truth promptly you could have then offered option 3 as restitution, but your integrity is way out of whack because you took it upon yourself to assume what the owner wants and then attempted to deceive them on this basis. This then becomes even more absurd of a choice due to the plot twist variable chance of even being able to successfully deceive them (ie: if the fish is highly specialized, the deception will be quickly detected and your integrity is totally trashed at that point.) Similar to option 2 you have totally failed your duty and also completely trashed your integrity, but in a more overt way which makes this solidly the worst option.

In conclusion option 1 is the superior choice overall because it fulfills your duty and maintains your integrity to the fish owner. In the plot twist that your actions caused the fish to die then option 1 and option 3 taken together is the best choice since by taking option 1 you're giving the owner the truth promptly (fulfilling your duty) and option 3 is an offer of restitution to make up for your direct failure to care for the fish. Option 1 by itself or in tandem with option 3 in addition to providing accountability also gives the owner the ability to make choices based on full knowledge of the truth (fulfilling your integrity to the owner). Option 2 and 4 are both evil options as both constitute a failure of your duty and on top of this go the extra mile to attempt to deceive and emotionally manipulate the fish owner for your own selfish motives (money, your ego, your emotions, etc.) Thus options 2 and 4 are both a failure of your duty and are a breach of your integrity to the owner. Regardless of the plot twist sub-scenarios option 1 will always be the superior option.

WOW!!!

@SonJudgment, I think you have written THE most precise, point-by-point breakdown reply to ANY beginning post I have ever written.

This might not sound like much, but after being here a while and writing what I guess must be at least 1,000+ threads (many years ago, a mod said I was up to over 400; it's been a very, very long time -- and a lot of writing since then,) I thereby must award you with both a trophy AND a medal for being a Grand Prize Poster!!

Not to mention, you also get a gold star , which is about tops on my personal rating scale!! (Back in grade school, I had a teacher or two I worked very hard for in order to see those gold foil stars on my papers!!)

THANK YOU for taking the time to write such a thorough (and thoroughly interesting) reply!

Bonus point: If you can't read this all congratulations you are proof that the average modern adult only has an 8 second attention span, which is literally less than that of a goldfish so technically speaking the goldfish has a better ability to understand this abstract thought experiment than the average modern adult.

This part made me laugh out loud!

I am happy to report that I read your post 2 1/2 times (I was distracted by a family member during my second reading, but was able to do another full review this morning.)

HOWEVER, even though I might have an attention span (slightly) greater than a goldfish, I must sheepishly admit that I'm pretty sure the goldfish is still smarter than I am (and probably by a wide margin.) You see, each time I read your post, I was picturing charts, graphs, and comparison table in order to try to keep up with all the excellent breakdowns of why each option was better or worse, etc. (I blame my need for visual data on being in school far longer than I wanted to be.)

I'm guessing that the goldfish would have been able to understand your answer WITHOUT all the additional fancy graphics, therefore, I must hand this victory over to Mr. Fins -- that is, if he's still alive -- but we'll see if I can do any better during the next round!

Thank you so much again for a very enjoyable read!

 

[seoulsearch]

This might be my last post for a bit. This is a tough choice, it depends on the person I'm looking after it for. If it's someone who I'm confident could bear the loss and not let it get in the way of their vacation, I'd do 1. But otherwise, I'd pick 2. And if the fish was a component in a broader circuit, like an aquarium, or some fish-activated electrical device, I'd do 3.
I'd only over do 4 if there was no emotional attatchment in the case of picking 3, in which case I wouldn't be tempted to pass it off as the original.

Yes I would have to confess how it died if it's my fault, because if I don't do it myself, God would do it for me, which would likely be the worse-case scenario however it happens.

What an excellent point!!

For some reason, I was thinking of just a lone fish, even though this thread is partially inspired by a true story, in which I was asked to "fish sit" for two scaled friends in an aquarium setting.

These were the days before personal phones and texting, and my friend was overseas. I didn't even have his email, so I literally had no way of contacting him, and unfortunately, things went very, very south in only the first few weeks. (I think he was gone a month.)

First, the water started turning cloudy... It was an electric tank that I had NO idea how to maintain -- and I was panicking, as I literally did not know what to do. Change the filter? Change the water? But I didn't have a clue as to what the proper procedure would be. I didn't know if the fish would survive in a bowl while I was trying to do all of that, either.

And so, my poor friend came home from his trip to a floating graveyard.

I was SO sorry, apologizing again and again and offering replacements, but he told me he already knew there was something fishy (pardon the pun,) going on before he had even left but wasn't able to address it, so he wasn't surprised at all that this happened.

I just wish he would have told me all this BEFORE he left -- it would have definitely saved me a lot of agony! (I did NOT like have to regularly witness two living creatures go through a slow, but inevitable, demise -- AT ALL.)

P.S. @Ceph, I saw your post about taking a spiritual break from the site -- I pray God will be with you and that you'll be able to come back feeling refreshed and renewed. Godspeed to you!

 

[seoulsearch]

I wouldn't be real excited about watching someone's goldfish. After being asked to do this favor I would tell them that I never had a goldfish that lived longer than a week so if they still want me to do the favor, they'll have to agree not to hold me responsible in the event their goldfish perishes under my care. If they are foolish enough to have me watch their goldfish and the little thing dies under my watch, my response would either be one or two, depending on which the fish owner said they preferred when I asked them if they would want to know right away or find out after their return if their little buddy passed.

LOL!!

I can't imagine a more obvious way of saying, "No, I don't want to watch your fish, and the likelihood of them surviving under my watch is almost less than zero to none."

But what I have an even harder time imaging is any earnest fish owner who, after hearing this, would STILL ask you to do so!

The only situation I can think of is someone who actually does not want the fish anymore, but is not brave enough or heartless enough to kill them off on their own.

Fortunately, we now know of such a person whom we can call for just this kind of task!!

By the way, @Tall_Timbers, what is your track record with cats, dogs, ferrets, and iguanas?!

Er... I'm just asking.

You know, for a friend.

 

[SonJudgment]

I wouldn't be real excited about watching someone's goldfish. After being asked to do this favor I would tell them that I never had a goldfish that lived longer than a week so if they still want me to do the favor, they'll have to agree not to hold me responsible in the event their goldfish perishes under my care. If they are foolish enough to have me watch their goldfish and the little thing dies under my watch, my response would either be one or two, depending on which the fish owner said they preferred when I asked them if they would want to know right away or find out after their return if their little buddy passed.

This is actually a very interesting amendation to option 2. Essentially by telling the owner ahead of time that you've never cared for a goldfish and pre-planning on whether they'd want to be notified immediately or wait until they return you would remove the deception element and actually make the delay part of your duty . In this way you actually mitigate the downfalls of option 2 by making it part of your duty and thus also maintain your integrity by making it compliant to the owner's wishes. This is actually a very genius work-around.

 

[SonJudgment]

WOW!!!

@SonJudgment, I think you have written THE most precise, point-by-point breakdown reply to ANY beginning post I have ever written.

This might not sound like much, but after being here a while and writing what I guess must be at least 1,000+ threads (many years ago, a mod said I was up to over 400; it's been a very, very long time -- and a lot of writing since then,) I thereby must award you with both a trophy AND a medal for being a Grand Prize Poster!!

Not to mention, you also get a gold star , which is about tops on my personal rating scale!! (Back in grade school, I had a teacher or two I worked very hard for in order to see those gold foil stars on my papers!!)

THANK YOU for taking the time to write such a thorough (and thoroughly interesting) reply!



This part made me laugh out loud!

I am happy to report that I read your post 2 1/2 times (I was distracted by a family member during my second reading, but was able to do another full review this morning.)

HOWEVER, even though I might have an attention span (slightly) greater than a goldfish, I must sheepishly admit that I'm pretty sure the goldfish is still smarter than I am (and probably by a wide margin.) You see, each time I read your post, I was picturing charts, graphs, and comparison table in order to try to keep up with all the excellent breakdowns of why each option was better or worse, etc. (I blame my need for visual data on being in school far longer than I wanted to be.)

I'm guessing that the goldfish would have been able to understand your answer WITHOUT all the additional fancy graphics, therefore, I must hand this victory over to Mr. Fins -- that is, if he's still alive -- but we'll see if I can do any better during the next round!

Thank you so much again for a very enjoyable read!

Lol well you don't have to be too modest. Being able to write more than a paragraph already indicates your attention span is greater than a goldfish lol. I'm not joking though about the average adult attention span being less than a goldfish lol I'll include a little link for interest.

https://sambarecovery.com/rehab-blog/average-human-attention-span-statistics/

 

[seoulsearch]

Lol well you don't have to be too modest. Being able to write more than a paragraph already indicates your attention span is greater than a goldfish lol. I'm not joking though about the average adult attention span being less than a goldfish lol I'll include a little link for interest.

https://sambarecovery.com/rehab-blog/average-human-attention-span-statistics/

I have actually read this statistic a few times before...

I have a family member who endured something like a 5-hour back surgery a few years ago. It had me thinking, by the time people my age need back surgeries (and several I've known are already needing them,) who would actually still have the attention span to perform them?! (Let alone what it takes to get through that kind of schooling, and the money to do so.)

I know some people will say that's what robots and AI will be for, but I think there are some elements of many highly-skilled fields that will still always require the supervision -- and extended attention span -- of a human being.

 

[Tall_Timbers]

By the way, @Tall_Timbers, what is your track record with cats, dogs, ferrets, and iguanas?!

I'm a dog lover, so mine have lived to old age. The other animals mentioned, especially cats, probably shouldn't be left in my care. I have a good track record with parakeets...

When my kids were little they'd each bring home a gold fish from a church festival each year. The fish would usually all be dead the next day. There was one hardy one that lasted a week.

 

[enril]

But... but...

How could you possibly fry up this adorable face?!


View attachment 283097

yum!

 

[enril]

Ooops, I made an error and gave a bad response. Leviticus 12:18 states, " Anyone who takes the life of someone’s animal must make restitution". If I caused the death of the fish, I owe the owner more than its value. I would seek to reimburse him in any way I can.

um... dude, why do I have 4 fish now?

 

[Seeker47]

um... dude, why do I have 4 fish now?

I caused the death so just replacing the one dead fish does not adequately compensate the owner. (God's rules, not mine.) Maybe he would want two fish and a box of food. It's his choice.

 

[Edward429451]

But... but...

How could you possibly fry up this adorable face?!


View attachment 283097

That's Hecklefish and he needs grilled.

 

[seoulsearch]

yum!

That's Hecklefish and he needs grilled.

Lol!

If nothing else, this thread is bringing out a very interesting personality trait indeed.

Those who see fish as pets, and those who see fish as dinner!

 

[Lynx]

Lol!

If nothing else, this thread is bringing out a very interesting personality trait indeed.

Those who see fish as pets, and those who see fish as dinner!

Fish are food, not friends.

 

[Snackersmom]

This thread reminds me of the time my little sister had 3 bait-shop goldfish as pets. They were ridiculously inexpensive but she was attached to them, even though bait-shop fish aren't known for their longevity.

One day she informed me that one had passed away, and asked if I would perform an autopsy (I had taken a few 4-H veterinary courses and handled a lot of the medical needs on our farm). So I said ok. She said that he was on the kitchen table whenever I was ready.

I found him there, eyes and mouth open, RESTING ON A PORCELAIN DINNER PLATE. One of the most disturbing things I have ever seen, and I do not say that lightly.

Once I recovered from the shock, I performed the amateur autopsy. All I could find amiss was that he died grossly obese. I reported back to my sister, she cut back on feeding for the 2 survivors and they both went on to live ridiculously long lives for bait-shop goldfish, 9 years I think? Not sure... but they were definitely falling apart by the time they departed, one was blind and had to be signaled for feeding by thumping the water and then dropping the food directly in his mouth.

Moral of the story: Get my sister to keep the goldfish for you and it should be OK as long as she forgets to feed it every now and then.

 

[Godsgirl1983]

Fish are food, not friends.

Are you sure about that?