Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-31-2007, 03:26 AM
gamblore99 gamblore99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,958
Default quick philosophy question

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?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-31-2007, 04:28 AM
RJT RJT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: East of Eden
Posts: 2,568
Default Re: quick philosophy question

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.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-31-2007, 04:29 AM
hashi92 hashi92 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 336
Default Re: quick philosophy question

According to lawsuits the life a 5 year old is significantly less than that of the bread winner.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-31-2007, 04:39 AM
cambraceres cambraceres is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Short of Mind
Posts: 1,950
Default Re: quick philosophy question

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.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-31-2007, 04:51 PM
arahant arahant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 991
Default Re: quick philosophy question

[ 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.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-31-2007, 04:55 PM
arahant arahant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 991
Default Re: quick philosophy question

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.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-31-2007, 05:01 PM
DougShrapnel DougShrapnel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,155
Default Re: quick philosophy question

[ 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?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-31-2007, 07:02 PM
bkholdem bkholdem is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,328
Default Re: quick philosophy question

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.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-31-2007, 07:17 PM
kurto kurto is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: in your heart
Posts: 6,777
Default Re: quick philosophy question

[ 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?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-31-2007, 07:47 PM
Silent A Silent A is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: out of the grid
Posts: 2,838
Default Re: quick philosophy question

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.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.