Which Lives Have Value?

[Dontaskme]

True, but at the same time a fetus for example has no rights so a woman has an abortion and throws it in the garbage can. The person has the force, the value, to avoid dying in the ditch. the fetus lacks value so ends up in the garbage. Which life has value? It can only be the man with the gun since the fetus is powerless lacking value.

A fetus has not developed the capacity to know it is a self-aware mature developed feeling sentient being yet. Why should nature care about the value of something that is not even self aware yet?

It's human nature to place value on a reality devoid of it. Humans are no different in the sense they seek only their own value, in other words humans seek to be the masters of their own craft. This is quite normal, all sentient creatures do the same for their own selfish preservation.

Value is a human concept aka the knowledge of knowing the 'ouch' is bad and the 'ahh' is good, that's the only value that exists in reality.
This value is a construct of knowledge, and the purveyors of this knowledge are known as human sentience.

So in essence the idea of ''value'' is born for self preservation purposes only, nature programmed it that way because nature is a selfish phenomena. It's not that one sentient life has more value than another, it's more to do with the survival of the most mature and strongest.

To say a fetus is powerless lacking value is meaningless to nature, and we could even argue the rights of the millions of sperm that rigorously swim toward the egg and yet don't ever get to penetrate the egg....do all those potential life forms not matter either?
Only one or two sperm make it to the egg, while millions of other potential life forms will be discarded, never to be given the chance of life...no, nature has no value, it cares not about who lives or dies, value is just a human construct, it's a programme, not really real.






.

[Nick_A]

True, but at the same time a fetus for example has no rights so a woman has an abortion and throws it in the garbage can. The person has the force, the value, to avoid dying in the ditch. the fetus lacks value so ends up in the garbage. Which life has value? It can only be the man with the gun since the fetus is powerless lacking value.

A fetus has not developed the capacity to know it is a self-aware mature developed feeling sentient being yet. Why should nature care about the value of something that is not even self aware yet?

It's human nature to place value on a reality devoid of it. Humans are no different in the sense they seek only their own value, in other words humans seek to be the masters of their own craft. This is quite normal, all sentient creatures do the same for their own selfish preservation.

Value is a human concept aka the knowledge of knowing the 'ouch' is bad and the 'ahh' is good, that's the only value that exists in reality.
This value is a construct of knowledge, and the purveyors of this knowledge are known as human sentience.

So in essence the idea of ''value'' is born for self preservation purposes only, nature programmed it that way because nature is a selfish phenomena. It's not that one sentient life has more value than another, it's more to do with the survival of the most mature and strongest.

To say a fetus is powerless lacking value is meaningless to nature, and we could even argue the rights of the millions of sperm that rigorously swim toward the egg and yet don't ever get to penetrate the egg....do all those potential life forms not matter either?
Only one or two sperm make it to the egg, while millions of other potential life forms will be discarded, never to be given the chance of life...no, nature has no value, it cares not about who lives or dies, value is just a human construct, it's a programme, not really real.

A fetus has not developed the capacity to know it is a self-aware mature developed feeling sentient being yet. Why should nature care about the value of something that is not even self aware yet?

A fetus has not developed the capacity to know it is a self-aware mature developed feeling sentient being yet. Why should nature care about the value of something that is not even self aware yet? Is it logical for a person to have respect for life if only self aware life has value?

Does only self aware life have value? Does a dog have value. It can be given value by its OWNER but does the dog have value defined by its MAKER? Does the concept of respect for life only concern self aware life

Why when we look into a dog's eyes do we believe it has value and worthy of life we didn't give it: a reason TO BE.

[Dontaskme]

Does only self aware life have value?

Yes, because the self aware human entity is the purveyor of knowledge, insofar as it invented the concept.

A dog is aware, but there is no self in a dog, like there is in a human. The dog does not look in the mirror and say to itself, god your an ugly fucker aren't you?

This self that is in the human mind, is a concept, which we call an ego. It's basically a knowledge born of concepts known by the consciousness that is manifest as that human.
Notice dogs don't have an ego like the human because dogs have no concept of themself as a thing in and of itself apart from anything else.

Does a dog have value.

Yes, but only in the sense they are known to be sentience like humans, they feel pain like we do, they also have an awareness that pain is bad and pleasure is good. Nature itself programmed an animal to move away from discomfort in favor of comfort. And that is an automatic response mechanism just like it is for every sentient creature..

It can be given value by its OWNER but does the dog have value defined by its MAKER? Does the concept of respect for life only concern self aware life

Well no sentient creature which is just a biological machine acting on impulses can know it's maker, no more than a toaster can know it's maker. The body is just a machine.
In the context of does the dog have value, yes, but only to the human, why, because the dog is the cause of pleasure for the dog owner. The value exchange is formed when the two sentient creatures form an alliance, when they become a comfort for each other offering what would otherwise have been isolation and loneliness / aka a negative ...as opposed to creating a postive in the newly formed company that would be seen as a value for the human and for the dog, although the dog would not be aware a value was being exchanged because dogs have no concept of value.

Why when we look into a dog's eyes do we believe it has value and worthy of life we didn't give it: a reason TO BE.

Because the dog gives us something that we want...which is always a positive, when we get what we need or want, we call that a value. We have no value for anything we don't want or need, so we call that the negative. Value is created in rejecting one thing in favor of another, and that is the nature of the human condition...it's not a condition of the animal, because an animal is an unconditional creature. The animal just acts according to it's immediate impulses. Whereas we have developed empathy where we are more aware of what we are doing and that what we do carries positive or negative consequences for our actions. animals don't know any better, but we do.



.

[Nick_A]

DAM

Well no sentient creature which is just a biological machine acting on impulses can know it's maker, no more than a toaster can know it's maker. The body is just a machine.
In the context of does the dog have value, yes, but only to the human, why, because the dog is the cause of pleasure for the dog owner. The value exchange is formed when the two sentient creatures form an alliance, when they become a comfort for each other offering what would otherwise have been isolation and loneliness / aka a negative ...as opposed to creating a postive in the newly formed company that would be seen as a value for the human and for the dog, although the dog would not be aware a value was being exchanged because dogs have no concept of value.

You offer a real philosophical question: Do objective values exist? You seem to agree with Protagoras who wrote: “Humans are the measure of all things.” To measure something in relation to Man defines its value. Beauty for example is relative and exists in the eye of the beholder.

Plato believed in objective reality such as beauty. Below Plato’s divided line is the domain of relative reality while above the divided line is the domain of objective reality.

We can say that the dog or fetus has no relative value of its own because our conscience is restricted to defining reality below the line. But to its maker the dog serves a necessary purpose within creation as a transformer of substances. Its value is defined by the Great Chain of Being initiated by its creator.

Humanity as a whole lives below the line so humanity is the measure of all things. It can through conscious evolution become aware of the reality of the higher attributes such as beauty, truth, good and existence, independent of human being.

So this is where we are. Is humanity restricted to the belief that Man is the measure of all things, or is it possible that some consciously evolve to experience that the source of our creation and the Great Chain of Being is the objective measure of all things and determines its value.

The other possibility is that God and Man are the same so by definition objective and subjective reality are the same?

[Dontaskme]

Humanity as a whole lives below the line so humanity is the measure of all things. It can through conscious evolution become aware of the reality of the higher attributes such as beauty, truth, good and existence, independent of human being.

The mind is the measure of all things.

And that is what the mind knows as knowledge.

Knowledge is a known conceptual dream story upon not-knowing silent being Nick

knowledge can include any concept that can be conceived of by the mind...including beauty, and ugly.

Notice the mind is never seen, it is only known as and through identification with concepts known, aka idea, which are also never seen, only known. This is the only truth there is, that can be known by that which is unknowable..this contradiction is what we are up against when the being is trying to get a look up it's own skirt.

.

[Nick_A]

Humanity as a whole lives below the line so humanity is the measure of all things. It can through conscious evolution become aware of the reality of the higher attributes such as beauty, truth, good and existence, independent of human being.

The mind is the measure of all things.

And that is what the mind knows as knowledge.

Knowledge is a known conceptual dream story upon not-knowing silent being Nick

knowledge can include any concept that can be conceived of by the mind...including beauty, and ugly.

Notice the mind is never seen, it is only known as and through identification with concepts known, aka idea, which are also never seen, only known. This is the only truth there is, that can be known by that which is unknowable..this contradiction is what we are up against when the being is trying to get a look up it's own skirt.

So you don't believe in the tripartite soul. Man is only mind but with no real body and spirit. Objective values don't exist but only exist in an imaginary creation

[Dontaskme]

Humanity as a whole lives below the line so humanity is the measure of all things. It can through conscious evolution become aware of the reality of the higher attributes such as beauty, truth, good and existence, independent of human being.

The mind is the measure of all things.

And that is what the mind knows as knowledge.

Knowledge is a known conceptual dream story upon not-knowing silent being Nick

knowledge can include any concept that can be conceived of by the mind...including beauty, and ugly.

Notice the mind is never seen, it is only known as and through identification with concepts known, aka idea, which are also never seen, only known. This is the only truth there is, that can be known by that which is unknowable..this contradiction is what we are up against when the being is trying to get a look up it's own skirt.

So you don't believe in the tripartite soul. Man is only mind but with no real body and spirit. Objective values don't exist but only exist in an imaginary creation

I don't believe what you believe. So I guess we're done. Bye!

[KLewchuk]

But self defense is a power. If might makes right as the definition of justice, then if a person cannot defend themselves they lack value. If another defends them, they have given the first person value.

There is no reason not to throw the two infant boys out of the window. Their mother didn't give them value and their helplessness assures they lack value. According to "might makes right" justice has been served.

First, all lives have value, the trick is always... to what degree?

Second, a life that experiences well-being is more valuable than a life that is experiencing suffering. If you disagree, which would you choose?

Of course, that is the easy part... the devil is in the details.

Hello Klewchuk

You wrote that all lives have value but to whom? If there is no one there to give them value, how can you say they have value and the infants shouldn't be thrown out of the window as valueless?

But self defense is a power. If might makes right as the definition of justice, then if a person cannot defend themselves they lack value. If another defends them, they have given the first person value.

There is no reason not to throw the two infant boys out of the window. Their mother didn't give them value and their helplessness assures they lack value. According to "might makes right" justice has been served.

First, all lives have value, the trick is always... to what degree?

Second, a life that experiences well-being is more valuable than a life that is experiencing suffering. If you disagree, which would you choose?

Of course, that is the easy part... the devil is in the details.

Hello Klewchuk

You wrote that all lives have value but to whom? If there is no one there to give them value, how can you say they have value and the infants shouldn't be thrown out of the window as valueless?

Sorry for delayed response.

I would say that "well being" has value over suffering. The anticipated response is, "what if throwing infants out the window brings me happiness"? I think science is increasingly providing guidance in this area; mirror neurons, altruism, meta-meditation, etc., increasingly support an objective value in this area. If I stick a needle in your hand a certain neuron fires. If I stick the needle in your spouses hand and you observe it, the same neuron fires.

Granted; many questions to ask but I think this is the moral path forward. May be the topic of my next dissertation.

[Nick_A]

Hi Kewchuk

Hello Klewchuk

You wrote that all lives have value but to whom? If there is no one there to give them value, how can you say they have value and the infants shouldn't be thrown out of the window as valueless?

Sorry for delayed response.

I would say that "well being" has value over suffering. The anticipated response is, "what if throwing infants out the window brings me happiness"? I think science is increasingly providing guidance in this area; mirror neurons, altruism, meta-meditation, etc., increasingly support an objective value in this area. If I stick a needle in your hand a certain neuron fires. If I stick the needle in your spouses hand and you observe it, the same neuron fires.

Granted; many questions to ask but I think this is the moral path forward. May be the topic of my next dissertation.

Does well being really have value over suffering?

Does a person inflicting torture have more value than the person being tortured? It raises the question of how we define value? For example; is compassion a valuable quality to have or or does it get in the way of valuing ones well being?