quick philosophy question

[gamblore99]

I don't visit this place often and I didn't do a search.

Anyways, in class we were discussing the value of life. Someone said the value of a 5 year olds life is the same as a 90 year old woman. I thought that was absolutely retarded. The 5 year olds life is way more valuable than the 90 year old.

Thoughts?

[RJT]

Relative to what? From who’s perspective? I doubt the 90 year old lady agrees with you. It all depends on what your touchstone is.

[hashi92]

According to lawsuits the life a 5 year old is significantly less than that of the bread winner.

[cambraceres]

Your question is invalid for the same reason human equality is a chimera. That is, there is no agreeable criterion for the judgment of humanity.

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
According to lawsuits the life a 5 year old is significantly less than that of the bread winner.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but significantly more than the 90 year old.

[arahant]

The only practical way I see to assign a value to a life is the NPV of future economic value.

Unfortunately, this means most 90-year-olds get a negative number.

But even on other, non-practical measures of the value of a life, I agree with you...I see no way to argue that the 5-year-old isn't more valuable. Give the 5yrold an expensive and prolonged terminal illness, and the calculus might change.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't visit this place often and I didn't do a search.

Anyways, in class we were discussing the value of life. Someone said the value of a 5 year olds life is the same as a 90 year old woman. I thought that was absolutely retarded. The 5 year olds life is way more valuable than the 90 year old. Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]The more important question is what is the value of life. The question cannot be answered until that has been desided. Valuable to whom, and valuable for what? Valueable for procreation, Valuable for knowledge, valueable for earning power, valuable for sacrifice. Valuable for what? Valuable to society, Valuable to family, valuable for CBS, valuable for Kindergarden teachers? Valuable to those that his/her life touches in a positive fashion, Valuable to themselves Valuable to whom?

[bkholdem]

I think that doug raises some excellent questions but overall would agree with the OP that the 5yo is more valuable. If I were in the ocean and there was a 5yo and a 90yo lady in there with me and niether could swim but I knew i could save either with exactly equal chances but could not save both i would save the 5yo wihtout question. they have much more potential to the world and the 90yo had her life allready.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
The only practical way I see to assign a value to a life is the NPV of future economic value.

Unfortunately, this means most 90-year-olds get a negative number.

But even on other, non-practical measures of the value of a life, I agree with you...I see no way to argue that the 5-year-old isn't more valuable. Give the 5yrold an expensive and prolonged terminal illness, and the calculus might change.

[/ QUOTE ]

What about the fact that the 90 year may still be able to self support while the 5 year COSTS money. The 5 years old value is untested future potential economic value. But any 5 year (other then infant models) have -economic value, no?

[Silent A]

Assuming an average 90 year old vs an average 5 year old here.

A typical 90 year old doesn't really support themselves, they usually live off the income from their savings. The problem here is that their savings don't die with them. As a whole, we get a little richer everytime a typical old person dies.

A five year old, however, only costs us temporatily and most will more than compensate for this during their working lifetime.

Oh, and I consider the best way to measure value of life (assuming no special information) is to simply estimate how many years they have left to live. By this measure the 5 year old wins easily.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]

Oh, and I consider the best way to measure value of life (assuming no special information) is to simply estimate how many years they have left to live. By this measure the 5 year old wins easily.

[/ QUOTE ] Yes, it seems that the question has been answered as who is more valuable to ME. As opposed to which ones life is more valuable to themselves. Which person has a better chance of affecting the lives of individuals not part of the question, in this case meaning the responder and asigner of value. I don't believe it is correct to respond that way when the question is about the value of life. It seems like if we rephrased the question "would you rather be 5 or 90?", we would get a better answer to the OP. I'd like to see the poeple in your class respond that they don't have a preference on being 5 or being 90.

[hashi92]

a 5 year olds life is full of potential

a 90 year olds life is full of memories and regrets

[cambraceres]

A five year old's life WILL be full of memories and regrets, however with the child, society must feel the effects of his/her actions, whereas the geriatric has little effect in that sense.

So what would Nietzhe say?

In practicality, I would choose the child because it would likely be easier to save with less risk. Now if they both appeared docile I'm not sure, it would probably come down to an emotional decision.

Cam

[coltrainSTL]

I seriously think most 90 year olds would agree that a 5 year olds life is more valuable.

[cambraceres]

[ QUOTE ]
I seriously think most 90 year olds would agree that a 5 year olds life is more valuable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly, this makes them correct.