The value of human life?

[Melon Hunter]

Degrees of separation, or the 'Monkeysphere' as it sometimes known. Someone you know is always going to trump a stranger in importance.

 

[tofulove]

also to point out the value of humans, the earth is way overcrowded, if your just a cog in the machine your life is worthless, only people who add to the progression of society have any real value in my eyes. which in turn makes my life at the moment more or less worthless. as i am currently nothing but a cog in the larger world. if your a doctor, your life has value cause you have the ability to save the life of some one with true value, as a farmer your life has no value being there over 6 billion in the world ready to take you place, unless your hard to replace, you have no value.

 

[JoJo]

the true value of a persons life cant be none as a mortal, perhaps baby 7billion and 3 will cure cancer, maybe he'll be a serial killer. basically, your value is your contribution or future contribution to society, for example, farmers as a hole are the most important group of people in society, individually there some of the least valued. on the other end, society can exist with out doctors, but as individuals doctors are highly valuable.

for example a 50 year old scientist whos one of the leading researchers for the cure for cancer is more valuable than a 1000 babies. if i had to choice between him or a thousand babies of unknown potential dieing, i pick the babies. maybe one of those babies might do some thing worth while to even the value, or to surpass it, but id wager none of the babies would be as good as him, nor there sum value put to gether would be as high as his,

An interesting point to add to your dilemma is that if the scientist who was working on the cure did die, someone would find it. There's a sort of myth around that certain scientists are absolute geniuses who will think of something no-one ever could. This is completely untrue, those (while admitably still very exceptional) people are simply lucky to think of the right thing at the right time. I'm not saying anyone could discover a cure for cancer but one person is ultimately replaceable.

If the choice was mine I would save the babies.

 

[Kevlar Eater]

There's too many humans on this planet for any to be of any value, myself included. Corporations see this, which can only partly explain why more of them opt for cheap overseas (or over-the-border) labor. The way I see it, people place value on lives because it's the morally right thing to do. Without morals like this, only the ones who control money will have it while everyone else would be living in huts, and I'm talking about the first world countries.

 

[Ranchcroutons]

Each human life is priceless. While some may have more to live for there is still a definite clinging that most have to their lives and this is for a reason. Its the most valuable thing we own.

 

[black_omega2]

Logically speaking, the human life is worthless and some lives are more worthless than others.

But, humans are emotional creatures and we give our own value to individuals who we know. Given the choice I think I would save my own loved one over a stranger's child.

So no, I don't think all life is equal and that people of value to us are more... well valuable to us than a stranger. Also, I think to a certain extent your little graphic is true at the same time, i.e. your child is worth more than say your mother.

 

[tofulove]

the true value of a persons life cant be none as a mortal, perhaps baby 7billion and 3 will cure cancer, maybe he'll be a serial killer. basically, your value is your contribution or future contribution to society, for example, farmers as a hole are the most important group of people in society, individually there some of the least valued. on the other end, society can exist with out doctors, but as individuals doctors are highly valuable.

for example a 50 year old scientist whos one of the leading researchers for the cure for cancer is more valuable than a 1000 babies. if i had to choice between him or a thousand babies of unknown potential dieing, i pick the babies. maybe one of those babies might do some thing worth while to even the value, or to surpass it, but id wager none of the babies would be as good as him, nor there sum value put to gether would be as high as his,

An interesting point to add to your dilemma is that if the scientist who was working on the cure did die, someone would find it. There's a sort of myth around that certain scientists are absolute geniuses who will think of something no-one ever could. This is completely untrue, those (while admitably still very exceptional) people are simply lucky to think of the right thing at the right time. I'm not saying anyone could discover a cure for cancer but one person is ultimately replaceable.

If the choice was mine I would save the babies.

maybe this doctor will cure it, it could take a hundred years for the right person in the right place at the right time to do what this doctor can do now, 100 years of untold deaths and suffering from cancer. maybe his colleges will do it just fine with out him, we don't know, all we know this doctor got the ability to cure cancer, the 1000 babies are unknown, but statistically less likely any of them would reach that mans ability, or close to it, and even as a hole are unlikely to be able to make up for his loss in society. a persons life is only a drop in the ocean, some people make bigger splashes.


-edit- look at albert einstein for example no one further the work newton did in tell albert arrived, the right man in the right place at the right time, no one but him was able to do it for 300 years, what if Albert died from the flue at 10 years old, our understanding of physics can still be in the newton era. we got a 50 year old man whos done a lot of good work so far, and a good chance of a lot more good work for society, of the 1000 unknown babies its very unlikely any of them would be as important to society as a hole as the 50 year old scientist is, let alone close.

if i had to choice albert dieing at the age of 10, or a million lives dead. id choice the million, unlikely any of them will contribute as much as albert did to society

 

[Colour Scientist]

I think the youth are worht protecting over the elderly because the old have already had a chance to live. It's not that they are useless or that their lives are worthless but they have experienced however many decade of life while a child has yet to experience, well, anything really.

 

[Ampersand]

I realize a lot of people like to say that life is worthless....to sound cool or existential or whatever, but out of all the people I've known in my life there has never been a single one that could ever be replaced.

 

[Jackhorse]

Attractive = Worth more
Smart = Worth more

I would generally agree with your age scale but children -4 would probably be further to the right on my list, maybe after adult. Of course it depends on the adult but its a gamble on the baby while the good, pretty, smart thirty year old is dead certain to be good and good for many years to come too.
I would beleive women more valuable, not very sure why but I would have more problem killing a girl my age (Teen catergory) than a male child.
Also whether I know people is a big factor I'd fight to the death for my freinds but frankly don't give a toss when 80 people are killed in a bombing. I know I shouldn't but I do.

 

[EeveeElectro]

I'd just like to point out something that has been in the papers regarding Eastenders, a British soap opera. Apparently they had thousands of complaints about a miscarriage storyline, but when a character dies of old age, no one complains. I don't watch the programme, but I think someone tried swapping babies? I'm sure it was something like that, which is probably why they were complaining.
Children are rarely murdered in movies, from what I've seen. I think a lot of people value babies and children's lives more than adults and elderly people.

 

[tofulove]

I realize a lot of people like to say that life is worthless....to sound cool or existential or whatever, but out of all the people I've known in my life there has never been a single one that could ever be replaced.

the lives of your friends and family might be priceless to you, but life of some guy across the world wouldn't bother you a dam bit, nor would your life or the lives of your friends and family matters to some one across the world. ( unless that person happens to have real value, like a doctor a scientist a exceptional artist and so on. )

 

[imnot]

Also whether I know people is a big factor I'd fight to the death for my freinds but frankly don't give a toss when 80 people are killed in a bombing. I know I shouldn't but I do.

Its called the monkeysphere its actually pretty intresting, I think cracked did an article.

 

[tofulove]

Also whether I know people is a big factor I'd fight to the death for my freinds but frankly don't give a toss when 80 people are killed in a bombing. I know I shouldn't but I do.

Its called the monkeysphere its actually pretty intresting, I think cracked did an article.

http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html

 

[JoJo]

I'd just like to point out something that has been in the papers regarding Eastenders, a British soap opera. Apparently they had thousands of complaints about a miscarriage storyline, but when a character dies of old age, no one complains. I don't watch the programme, but I think someone tried swapping babies? I'm sure it was something like that, which is probably why they were complaining.
Children are rarely murdered in movies, from what I've seen. I think a lot of people value babies and children's lives more than adults and elderly people.

Though I'm guessing you haven't experienced parenthood yet, once you do I can almost guarantee that you will value children in general lives over those of adults. It becomes a natural response in your mind to treat any danger to a child as something hugely disturbing.

 

[beniki]

£7.50 worth of chemicals and water. But that was about 10 years ago, so I think the average human is cheaper now.

But, strictly speaking, the value of a human is the amount of productivity they do versus what they consume. That doesn't directly correlate to a straight I earn this much money, I spend this much. You have to take into account the other factors, such as free work done, population propagation, even simplistic things like opening a door for someone which allows them to get to where they're going quicker allowing them to do fractionally more production than they would otherwise do.

So I'm going to stick to £7.50 of the price of a broken condom.

 

[Sinisterspider]

How much money is in their pockets at the time?
Because tbh that's pretty much the only worth any individual person has unless they've created or done something incredible, walked on the moon, wrote a classic, whatever. something that really shines as an example of what people can do. But of course those people will all hang around in history books and whenever you press the on button, as for the average joe? Yeh, pocket change and a second hand ipod.

 

[JoJo]

the true value of a persons life cant be none as a mortal, perhaps baby 7billion and 3 will cure cancer, maybe he'll be a serial killer. basically, your value is your contribution or future contribution to society, for example, farmers as a hole are the most important group of people in society, individually there some of the least valued. on the other end, society can exist with out doctors, but as individuals doctors are highly valuable.

for example a 50 year old scientist whos one of the leading researchers for the cure for cancer is more valuable than a 1000 babies. if i had to choice between him or a thousand babies of unknown potential dieing, i pick the babies. maybe one of those babies might do some thing worth while to even the value, or to surpass it, but id wager none of the babies would be as good as him, nor there sum value put to gether would be as high as his,

An interesting point to add to your dilemma is that if the scientist who was working on the cure did die, someone would find it. There's a sort of myth around that certain scientists are absolute geniuses who will think of something no-one ever could. This is completely untrue, those (while admitably still very exceptional) people are simply lucky to think of the right thing at the right time. I'm not saying anyone could discover a cure for cancer but one person is ultimately replaceable.

If the choice was mine I would save the babies.

maybe this doctor will cure it, it could take a hundred years for the right person in the right place at the right time to do what this doctor can do now, 100 years of untold deaths and suffering from cancer. maybe his colleges will do it just fine with out him, we don't know, all we know this doctor got the ability to cure cancer, the 1000 babies are unknown, but statistically less likely any of them would reach that mans ability, or close to it, and even as a hole are unlikely to be able to make up for his loss in society. a persons life is only a drop in the ocean, some people make bigger splashes.


-edit- look at albert einstein for example no one further the work newton did in tell albert arrived, the right man in the right place at the right time, no one but him was able to do it for 300 years, what if Albert died from the flue at 10 years old, our understanding of physics can still be in the newton era. we got a 50 year old man whos done a lot of good work so far, and a good chance of a lot more good work for society, of the 1000 unknown babies its very unlikely any of them would be as important to society as a hole as the 50 year old scientist is, let alone close.

if i had to choice albert dieing at the age of 10, or a million lives dead. id choice the million, unlikely any of them will contribute as much as albert did to society

Sorry but that's not how science works. Einstein was a genius, but by now someone else would have found his theory. Even more so in a field such as cancer were you have many teams across the world painstakingly finding new knowledge to help fight it. Also scientists never work alone nowadays so someone else could easily continue his or her work.

Think of what you would lose, 1000 beautiful infants, all the grief their family would be put though, for just a tiny delay in the march of science.

 

[Uncreation]

Well, it guess a life is a life, but as humans it's hard not to try to sort everything out and put it on some scale.
And yes, women lives are considered to hold more value then mens lives by most people in our society. And that makes me sad. But i guess there's not much i can do about it. One of the reasons i would have prefered to be a woman, i guess.