Is all human life of equal value?

[She]

Just something I've been pondering... and why or why not?

[VegasNick]

To God yes to me no

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
To God yes to me no

[/ QUOTE ]
0 != 0?

[VegasNick]

? what

[She]

Maybe it would have been better to ask what determines human value?

[VegasNick]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it would have been better to ask what determines human value?

[/ QUOTE ]Assumeing there is a God He and only he can judge what is good and what isnt...but im sure i can speak for god when i said he holds all human life equal

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it would have been better to ask what determines human value?

[/ QUOTE ]Assumeing there is a God He and only he can judge what is good and what isnt...but im sure i can speak for god when i said he holds all human life equal

[/ QUOTE ]

Many an atrocity has been predicated on the idea that "I'm sure I can speak for God when..."

[m_the0ry]

If he values all life equally how is there a filtering process for getting into heaven? Doesn't he always assume the sinner has a lesser valued life?

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
Is all human life of equal value?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no intrinsic value to human life - or to anything else for that matter. That's the beauty of the universe - although almost all see it as very uncomfortable and a disconbobulated notion, thus the invention of God(s).

-Zeno

[VegasNick]

[ QUOTE ]
If he values all life equally how is there a filtering process for getting into heaven? Doesn't he always assume the sinner has a lesser valued life?

[/ QUOTE ]why would god not hold everyone equal...everyone is born without sin ....or havent dont anything wrong....its things that happen in life that causes someone to be a moster or a saint...outcome doesnt matter....the point is we are all equal at birth

[Piers]

Depends what metric you use to determine the value of human life.

[hmkpoker]

No.

Value is relative.

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
Value is relative.

[/ QUOTE ]
To what?

[pokerbobo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Value is relative.

[/ QUOTE ]
To what?

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say my cruiseship is sinking....my life, my wife's, and my two kids lives have the most value to me. Everyone else is secondary. I am not saying my family's lives are more valuable than anyone else's, but they are to me.

Rapists, murderers and the like are all equally worthless to me, unless they have wronged my family. Then their life becomes very important, because i will take it from them personally and very slowly and painfully. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[btmagnetw]

also, i would value a child's life more than an elderly man's.

[Duke]

No, not all lives are of equal value. However, who is worth more can depend heavily on the metric. Charles Manson might be worth more than Einstein depending on how you're scoring.

[Taraz]

I would like to think that I value all human life equally. I probably don't since I have to say that I would be more likely to save family members over strangers.

If you're asking if I value the life of a leading scientist more than a starving child in a third world country I would answer no. I realize there is an argument against this position, but I just don't think you can put a value on human life.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
also, i would value a child's life more than an elderly man's.

[/ QUOTE ]

What about a baby? A fetus? An embryo?

[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Value is relative.

[/ QUOTE ]
To what?

[/ QUOTE ]

How one values one's own life influences how one values others.

That is, unless you're capable of coming to objective conclusions and finding a null position.

That implies, though, that value can only be correctly concluded by a third party.

So there's little merit in posing hypothetical situations, and individual statements about how h/she would value a life carries bias.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Value is relative.

[/ QUOTE ]
To what?

[/ QUOTE ]
To the one to whom the value is given.

[kerowo]

Of course they are not equal. All humans do is judge other people, ranking them higher or lower than themselves. The actual value of a human life only matters to the people who are using the guns. Look at how fast we (America) went into Europe to stop a genocide that pales in comparison to several in Africa.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
I would like to think that I value all human life equally. I probably don't since I have to say that I would be more likely to save family members over strangers.

If you're asking if I value the life of a leading scientist more than a starving child in a third world country I would answer no. I realize there is an argument against this position, but I just don't think you can put a value on human life.

[/ QUOTE ]

All you're doing is turning "value" into a vague and meaningless word.

[Alex-db]

[ QUOTE ]
I would like to think that I value all human life equally. I probably don't since I have to say that I would be more likely to save family members over strangers.

If you're asking if I value the life of a leading scientist more than a starving child in a third world country I would answer no. I realize there is an argument against this position, but I just don't think you can put a value on human life.

[/ QUOTE ]

I lot of people say this emphatically, but its not true; they value theirs and others' lives intuitively every time they are in a position to make a decision on a safety related purchase (safety equipment, mode of transport etc).

They also usually dislike it when you point out what they did (and the value they chose) /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would like to think that I value all human life equally. I probably don't since I have to say that I would be more likely to save family members over strangers.

If you're asking if I value the life of a leading scientist more than a starving child in a third world country I would answer no. I realize there is an argument against this position, but I just don't think you can put a value on human life.

[/ QUOTE ]

All you're doing is turning "value" into a vague and meaningless word.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get it. I have no idea how to put a value on a human life. They obviously all have some value to me, but that doesn't mean that I know what it is. And in matters of life and death I don't think it's my place to choose one over the other.

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would like to think that I value all human life equally. I probably don't since I have to say that I would be more likely to save family members over strangers.

If you're asking if I value the life of a leading scientist more than a starving child in a third world country I would answer no. I realize there is an argument against this position, but I just don't think you can put a value on human life.

[/ QUOTE ]

I lot of people say this emphatically, but its not true; they value theirs and others' lives intuitively every time they are in a position to make a decision on a safety related purchase (safety equipment, mode of transport etc).

They also usually dislike it when you point out what they did (and the value they chose) /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, my day to day decisions favor those who I know well. I don't distribute all my earnings among everyone I pass on the street. But when it comes to ending a life, I don't think I am in a position to choose one over another based on some "value".

[PairTheBoard]

Saying there is a "metric" or "measure" for the value of a human life is another case of making an analogy to a mathematical concept and then treating the subject as if mathematics actually applied.

We conceptualize Value in this context as requiring Someone to whom the Value applies. Thus requiring something like a God to whom an "intrinsic" Value of human life applies. But this might just be a shortcoming in our conceptualization. Even an Atheist could have the sense that our limited conceptualization points to something we have yet to conceive about an intrinsic Value to human life, which does not require some kind of God to do the Valuing. I'm not an expert on Buddhism but I suspect they might have some concept which might be loosely translated as Value which illuminates an intrinsic "value" to human life.

It may be that existence values existence just as I value my own life. Just because we have difficulty with that without a personification doesn't mean it's not possible.

PairTheBoard

[godBoy]

It depends who is doing the measuring of that value,

If it is society measuring a persons value then no, all people contribute differently.

Personally I value all human life with the same measure, we are equally valuable.

[kerowo]

[ QUOTE ]
It depends who is doing the measuring of that value,

If it is society measuring a persons value then no, all people contribute differently.

Personally I value all human life with the same measure, we are equally valuable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Until you have to choose between someone you love and someone you don't know.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It depends who is doing the measuring of that value,

If it is society measuring a persons value then no, all people contribute differently.

Personally I value all human life with the same measure, we are equally valuable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Until you have to choose between someone you love and someone you don't know.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he has to choose between his wife and Charles Manson he's either flipping a coin or letting them both die. Any other behavior would mean that what he just wrote is a lie.

[kerowo]

Ahh, I didn't think of using the CM test for this. Good call.

[David Sklansky]

"I don't get it. I have no idea how to put a value on a human life."

So if somebody, or some group, or you, is willing to spend 3x dollars to save A's life but only x dollars to save B's life, you don't think it can be said that they are valuing A's life three times higher?

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]
"I don't get it. I have no idea how to put a value on a human life."

So if somebody, or some group, or you, is willing to spend 3x dollars to save A's life but only x dollars to save B's life, you don't think it can be said that they are valuing A's life three times higher?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you misunderstood me. I meant that I don't think that I would be willing to spend more to save A over B. And I can't see any reason why I would say A's life is worth more than B's life.

This doesn't mean that I don't understand that others can have differing values for different people.

[godBoy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It depends who is doing the measuring of that value,

If it is society measuring a persons value then no, all people contribute differently.

Personally I value all human life with the same measure, we are equally valuable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Until you have to choose between someone you love and someone you don't know.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he has to choose between his wife and Charles Manson he's either flipping a coin or letting them both die. Any other behavior would mean that what he just wrote is a lie.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well there's nothing like a hypothetical with a raving lunatic who makes you choose between two people to blow all reasonable answers out the water..

It doesn't mean I have lied, that I do not wish to do the choosing who deserves to live and die. Obviously in the case of your hypothetical I would try and save both starting with my wife.

Really, I could challenge almost any belief you hold, no matter how reasonable it was, if I were allowed to bring in off-side hypotheticals like this.
This is why debated like the abortion debate never get anywhere, people bring in hypotheticals that lead no-where and generate no answers.

It's basic human rights and ethics to agree that the black is no lesser than the white, the female no lesser than the male, you can disagree but that would make you a racist, a sexist or a fool.

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
If he has to choose between his wife and Charles Manson he's either flipping a coin or letting them both die. Any other behavior would mean that what he just wrote is a lie.

[/ QUOTE ] It is possible to try and look at the world without the restraints of your own perspective. Godboy's wife obviously has higher value to Godboy than a lot of random people, but that doesn't mean he has to say in a philosophical debate that he thinks she is an especially valuable person. He believes a separate value system exists, that is not based on his personal preferances. Just because you don't believe the same doesn't mean he is lying.

[kerowo]

The problem is he is talking in absolutes yet at the same time is saying he values his wife more than some random person which one is it? I don't think there are very many absolutes and this is certainly one place where there aren't any. Too many problems arise when policy is decided removed from the dirt and grit of everyday life. We understand that you value all life highly, but saying you value all life equally and then basing an argument on it is disingenuous.

[wtfsvi]

I agree that it is not good wording to say "I personally value all human life equally", that can't be true for anyone except the most depressed and lonely people. But to say "I believe all human life has equal value" is different, and ok if you believe in an absolute morality removed from your personal preferences.

[kerowo]

"I believe all human life has equal value" except for my wife v a random person? You are still trying to have it both ways.

[wtfsvi]

No. There is no exception for my wife vs. a random person.

If I had a choice between saving my wife and a random person and I knew I would have 80% success rate in saving the random person and 70% success rate in saving my wife, the right thing to do would be saving the random person. That doesn't mean I would do it. I would save my wife, something I thought was morally wrong, because it was my personal preference to do so.

This is all assuming I believe there is an absolute morality that states all human lives are of equal value. I don't think I believe that, but it's not inconsistent to believe in it and still say you would rather save your wife.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
No. There is no exception for my wife vs. a random person.

If I had a choice between saving my wife and a random person and I knew I would have 80% success rate in saving the random person and 70% success rate in saving my wife, the right thing to do would be saving the random person. That doesn't mean I would do it. I would save my wife, something I thought was morally wrong, because it was my personal preference to do so.

This is all assuming I believe there is an absolute morality that states all human lives are of equal value. I don't think I believe that, but it's not inconsistent to believe in it and still say you would rather save your wife.

[/ QUOTE ]
better than that we could believe everyone has the same value from a moral point of view AND its morally correct for everyone to put their nearest and dearest first.

chez

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
No. There is no exception for my wife vs. a random person.

If I had a choice between saving my wife and a random person and I knew I would have 80% success rate in saving the random person and 70% success rate in saving my wife, the right thing to do would be saving the random person. That doesn't mean I would do it. I would save my wife, something I thought was morally wrong, because it was my personal preference to do so.

This is all assuming I believe there is an absolute morality that states all human lives are of equal value. I don't think I believe that, but it's not inconsistent to believe in it and still say you would rather save your wife.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are grossly abusing the word value, I think.

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
better than that we could believe everyone has the same value from a moral point of view AND its morally correct for everyone to put their nearest and dearest first.

chez

[/ QUOTE ] Yes. This would also be possible, and perhaps even better.

[godBoy]

I don't think so.

Is all human life of equal value?
Is drastically different to
Personally, do you value humans equally.

Edit: though I don't want to quibble about words.. Just trust me on this one.

[LooseCaller]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
better than that we could believe everyone has the same value from a moral point of view AND its morally correct for everyone to put their nearest and dearest first.

chez

[/ QUOTE ] Yes. This would also be possible, and perhaps even better.

[/ QUOTE ]