A couple of common mistakes I see made, especially on this thread, are the confusion of a human animal with a human life.
I don't think it's something really appreciated until one begins to live their life -- and enjoy it, too. If you don't value your own life, you'll struggle to value others'.
NOT AIMED AT YOU. Just using your thing to make a point.
Naturally you're joking, but that wasn't logical at all.
Anyway, I have only one thing to add to this conversation:
Assuming that we're using "value" to mean contribution to society (which many seem to be taking it as), then obviously value would be an entirely relative thing. Although black_omega2 made no sense when he came to the second part of his sentence, he is technically correct in that "value" is a constructed, abstract thing--value, apart from humans, is a meaningless thing. Although, simply because something wouldn't exist without us hardly means that it doesn't exist or that it's meaningless because of that. But it does mean that we must always be aware of its relativity to us, and that because it hinges on us, its definition might change at any moment.
Now, again, assuming that we're meaning "value" as contribution to society, then the valuated list I'm giving here is relative. A physically infirm person can contribute greatly to society, or they can at least contribute--but if they're not Stephen Hawking, and just of normal intelligence, they cannot contribute at the level of a physically normal individual. This isn't meant to be evil, it's simply a fact--it isn't meant to say that they're worthless, merely that due to a trick of fate they are objectively worth less using the standard that's been set. To the list!
Senile elderly people, the mentally infirm/handicapped of other ages, the permanently sickened and babies would be worth the least, followed by the physically infirm (in some cases--individuals like Stephen Hawking highlight the relative nature of this list) and the very elderly (but not mentally infirm). Then would come children and young adults. Among adults it's difficult to draw lines of value, because of their varied contributions and health, so to sum up I would say that adults are worth the most.
Babies are only just above senile elderly, which some would argue, but again I'm counting contribution to society--not "potential" contribution to society. Potential is worth far, far less than actual when it comes to people, because among people potential is flighty, insubstantial, and just as given to not coming true as it is to coming true.
A couple of common mistakes I see made, especially on this thread, are the confusion of a human animal with a human life.
I don't think it's something really appreciated until one begins to live their life -- and enjoy it, too. If you don't value your own life, you'll struggle to value others'.
NOT AIMED AT YOU. Just using your thing to make a point.
Absolutely. This thread seems to be concerned with Human life in its most ley sense. As in the value of one person to another, based solely on the opinions of the people concerned. The value of the human existense, such that it is, in reference to the immeasurably complex sequence of electrical impulses and hormone levels that make up the human characters we know, are strangers to, love, hate, give birth to and kill, cannot be quantified and as such cannot really be discussed in any meaningful way.
Once mankind develops the technology to effectively cut and paste human personalities, which is inevitable at some point in the far-distant future, we will be able to express the value of each human existence in terms of the amount of data required to store it. That is when the debate really starts.
I would say that in terms of age;
Pre-teen to adult are the same = worth the most.
Children and elderly come next.
Babies the old and the very old are worth the least.
I understand a lot of people won't like that "babies being worth the least" bit but i view this from an objective and survival based perspective, babies and the old will require the most care and be the least productive, while adults teens and pre-teens can all take on various duties. The children could spend their days in the care of the elderly, laughing and playing unitl they are themselves ready to take on duties.
(for some reason i'm picturing a kind of tribe)
Other factors that play into human worth (as i far as i see it) are whether or not you know a person and their skills/talents/relative usefullness.
Everyone is born equal, but actions change worth as time passes.
As for our "lives" (our experience and our memories) they're worth bugger all.
My personal order, from most valuable to least valuable:
Preteen - Teenager - Child - Baby - Young adult- Adult - Elderly - Old - Very old
For an explanation of why I think like this, here's a thread I made earlier today: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.255269-Poll-The-sanctity-of-life#9551870
It's not that you can't apply the idea of value to a human life, it's just not something we SHOULD do. When people start believing that some people's lives are worth more than others, you end up in situations like, The Holocaust.
Human life has no inherent value. Any perceived values are caused by the contradicting paradigms of morality.
Killing is perceived as wrong, so it is a taboo. But a death changes nothing; a finite existence is finite regardless of what occurs. nothing will change the fact that the human race will eventually die out or evolve into something different.
Didn't he kill alot of people to get that $70,000?
OT: I value humanity so lowly (myself included) that I don't think that humans are capable of assessing a proper value for humanity. Or at least thats where I am now.
It's not that you can't apply the idea of value to a human life, it's just not something we SHOULD do. When people start believing that some people's lives are worth more than others, you end up in situations like, The Holocaust.
Recently I've seen a couple of threads on the site where a number of people say that they would have no problem taking a human life, if need be. And that got me wondering; What is the value of human life?
Are certain people worth more than others? If we follow the logic of certain actions taken by many people confronted with taking the lives of those who are innocent, it follows a specific order. I present this order from left to right, with left being the most important "life" and right being the less important:
Baby - Child - Preteen - Teenager - Young adult - Adult - Elderly - Old - Very old.
Certain stages in growing up may be missing, but you get the general idea. Does this mean that a baby's life is worth so much more than that of a very old person? And how do we measure it?
Are certain lives of talented people, who can have great effect on the future of the world worth more than that of someone who will grow up to be a bum? We won't know until later in life, but then, when they are adults, is the life of a cancer-scientist worth more than that of a homeless person?
And also, are women worth more than men? We see in movies, documentaries and the news that it is sometimes portrayed as if women hold greater value than men, when they are killed/die. Their deaths are more "shocking" if you get my drift. Maybe that's because men are more often the perpetrators of such actions?
I know this thread poses a lot of questions, and I'm not asking you to answer them all. I just know that I don't hold the answers, and I'll leave the debate up to you.
Do all lives hold equal value, or are lives of the young and innocent worth more than that of the adult and old?
people who say "All lives have equal value" are wrong
that implies that Hitler is worth the same as your mother is worth the same as a Hobo is worth the same as Beethoven and so on
If you lost a family member in WW2 you'd put Hitler at the bottom of the list
If your mother locked you in a closet for the first 10 years of your life you'd put her at the bottom of the list
If you're an elitist bastard you'll put the Hobo at the bottom of the list
and if you hate classical music you'll put Beethoven at the bottom of the list
the value of a human life is all subjective
each person will have a different value for each person
you ask me if I'd rather save a kid or an old person
if that's all the context I'm given I'll let 'em both die
now you ask me if I'd save Trent Smith over an old person
I'll save the old person because Trent Smith is a dick
and as for your "they could grow up to cure cancer" comment
do you think that's going to happen in your lifetime?
It's not that you can't apply the idea of value to a human life, it's just not something we SHOULD do. When people start believing that some people's lives are worth more than others, you end up in situations like, The Holocaust.
You would need a morality that is at odds with most people's morality to consider that it could possibly be the right thing to do. What I mean is, if you believe that it is the right thing to do, then you will be considered by the rest of us (including myself) as evil.
It's not that you can't apply the idea of value to a human life, it's just not something we SHOULD do. When people start believing that some people's lives are worth more than others, you end up in situations like, The Holocaust.
You would need a morality that is at odds with most people's morality to consider that it could possibly be the right thing to do. What I mean is, if you believe that it is the right thing to do, then you will be considered by the rest of us (including myself) as evil.
Indeed, the rest of the world would consider me evil. That wouldn't mean I was wrong though. Evil is merely a fancy word for "doesn't agree with the rest of us".
Edit: Just so I won't get banned due to misunderstandings: I don't actually believe genocide is right. I'm just saying that it isn't impossible that it might be.
The life of myself or someone I know is to me more important than the life of a stranger. This is the same for most people. How many of you can say you would give your life for even ten random strangers? Only a very few. How many of you can say you would give the life of a friend for ten random strangers? Even less. I know I couldn't.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
