Human Value

[public hermit]

I have basic regard for all people starting out based on their potential. Whether they rise or fall in my judgment depends on their virtues.

Given your position that makes sense to me Presumably all people have the potential to be honest, trustworthy, intelligent, productive, which is what you value in relationships. So, there is something (potential) all humans share. But ultimately the primary value is not the potential for virtue but actual virtue, which not every one exhibits.

Why should they be virtuous to you? You value their virtue because it benefits you, and your primary concern for your life. But what is their motivation, the same? Is it something along the lines of the "golden rule" to treat others as you would want to be treated?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

What is the basis of human value? If one doesn't consider humans to be created in the image of God, which is often considered a basis for human value for some theists, what confers human value, if anything? There are a number of religious conceptions and non-religious conceptions possible here, I assume.

Do humans have inherent value? If so, how so? If not, why not?

Here are some possibilities that come to my mind, if we assume human value has no transcendent, metaphysical (inherent) basis, resting solely (if at all) on properties of being human:

A. All humans have value due to a conjunction of properties that all humans share, e.g. all humans are alive + all have potential to contribute to the common well-being + all care about their own well-being, etc. (The list of properties might be very different than these, but there are some properties that all humans share that confers value on the every member of the whole).

B. All humans have value because we value ourselves and by an act of empathy can see others as being similar, with similar wants and needs. (This would be something like the golden rule-treat others as you want to be treated-which seems to be ubiquitous among the world's religions and philosophies.)

C. Only some humans have value based on their peculiar set of properties. There are a couple possibilities here.
1. All humans of value share similar properties (intelligent + cooperative + contributes to the well-being of all + industrious). (These, again, could be very different, but all humans of value share similar properties. Also, those who don't share that set are not of value.)
2. Some humans are of value, but they might have radically different sets of value-conferring properties and they only have value in relation to some people. (For example, there are some people that have value according to me for various reasons. There is a different set that has value to you. Human value is idiosyncratic to the one who confers human value.)

I am sure there are other possibilities. And, it might be that some hold that no humans have value, which I would be really interested in hearing more about.

People do not have intrinsic value in my opinion. We assign value based on our own subjective preferences. I try to value everyone at a certain minimum level because I think it is the kind thing to do and it makes the world a better place if we all did.

 

[public hermit]

I think Nietzsche understood the value of others primarily in terms of self-interest. "At the risk of displeasing innocent ears, I submit that egoism belongs to the essence of a noble soul, I mean the unalterable belief that to a being such as 'we' other beings must naturally be in subjection and have to sacrifice themselves to us." Beyond Good and Evil

 

[Robban]

I think Nietzsche understood the value of others primarily in terms of self-interest. "At the risk of displeasing innocent ears, I submit that egoism belongs to the essence of a noble soul, I mean the unalterable belief that to a being such as 'we' other beings must naturally be in subjection and have to sacrifice themselves to us." Beyond Good and Evil

At some point one must think of oneself.

Genesis 30:30

 

[jayem]

I haven’t read every post and this may have been already mentioned. But our valuation of life is biological. Fundamentally, it’s the self-preservation instinct. And as a social species, we instinctively extend that value to others. BUT, our valuation of others is hierarchical. The highest value—in most cases—goes to members of our family. Followed by close friends and acquaintances. And usually, but not always, our value of others decreases roughly in proportion to the degree of separation from ourselves.

 

[public hermit]

And as a social species, we instinctively extend that value to others.

That makes sense, and might indicate why some version of the golden rule comes up in so many different contexts.

 

[zippy2006]

Here are some possibilities that come to my mind, if we assume human value has no transcendent, metaphysical (inherent) basis, resting solely (if at all) on properties of being human:

Isn't the claim that humans have value in virtue of their being created in the image of God the result of a property that humans possess? That is, why couldn't "made in the image of God" be a property?

In light of this I think an interesting and related question would ask how value is grounded whatsoever, particularly a kind of sacred value. In that case we would be forced to ask why the imago dei property confers that special irreducible value so central to Western law. For some other category options, see my quote in this post (link).

 

[FireDragon76]

Isn't the claim that humans have value in virtue of their being created in the image of God the result of a property that humans possess? That is, why couldn't "made in the image of God" be a property?

"Image of God" need not be interpreted as a property of humanity. It could be a vocation of humanity, for instance.

 

[public hermit]

Isn't the claim that humans have value in virtue of their being created in the image of God the result of a property that humans possess? That is, why couldn't "made in the image of God" be a property?

Absolutely, it could be (is) a property that humans possess. Or, so say I.

Take the three properties you mention in your linked post: rationality, freedom, ability to love. I don't see why those couldn't be candidates for the conjunction of properties in A of the OP. And, those could be properties recognized by someone who isn't informed by a concept of the imago dei.

An atheist could argue that humans have value based on those three properties that all humans share. They probably would not conclude that it means they are created in the image of God. Nonetheless, they could (possibly) argue for human value based on those same properties.

 

[Bradskii]

I haven’t read every post and this may have been already mentioned. But our valuation of life is biological. Fundamentally, it’s the self-preservation instinct. And as a social species, we instinctively extend that value to others. BUT, our valuation of others is hierarchical. The highest value—in most cases—goes to members of our family. Followed by close friends and acquaintances. And usually, but not always, our value of others decreases roughly in proportion to the degree of separation from ourselves.

I think the above sums it up quite well.

We value ourselves and our ability to empathise with others leads us to accept that their lives are equally valuable to them. So that's an inherrent value that we accept. That said, as Jayem says, we value those closer to us on an individual basis. I'd save my daughter from a burning building rather than a complete stranger.

And we actually feel more empathetic to individuals as opposed to groups of people. As Stalin (I think) said: 'The death of a million is a statistic; the death of one is a tragedy'. That's why charities will focus on the one child that needs help rather than the tens of thousands in need.

 

[Ken-1122]

What is the basis of human value? If one doesn't consider humans to be created in the image of God, which is often considered a basis for human value for some theists, what confers human value, if anything? There are a number of religious conceptions and non-religious conceptions possible here, I assume.

Do humans have inherent value? If so, how so? If not, why not?.

If somebody cares about you, your life has value to them, thus your life has value.

 

[Bradskii]

If somebody cares about you, your life has value to them, thus your life has value.

I think we need to be careful using that definition. Because if no-one cares for you, in fact if people actively consider you a detriment to their society, then they can be deemed to have no value. And removed from that society.

 

[Ken-1122]

I think we need to be careful using that definition. Because if no-one cares for you, in fact if people actively consider you a detriment to their society, then they can be deemed to have no value. And removed from that society.

Even if you care for yourself, your life has value; even if to nobody but yourself. As far as being removed from society, if people hate you enough, they will do that anyway.

 

[Bradskii]

Even if you care for yourself, your life has value; even if to nobody but yourself. As far as being removed from society, if people hate you enough, they will do that anyway.

Agreed. And it's our ability to empathise that helps us realise that other lives likewise have value. Hence the Golden Rule. If you want to remove someone from society then you need to remove that feeling of empathy. Which is quite often why the 'others' you intend removing are described in ways that remove their humanity: Animals, vermin, cockroaches etc.

 

[MehGuy]

What is the basis of human value? If one doesn't consider humans to be created in the image of God, which is often considered a basis for human value for some theists, what confers human value, if anything? There are a number of religious conceptions and non-religious conceptions possible here, I assume.

Do humans have inherent value? If so, how so? If not, why not?

I do not see human beings having any inherent value. History is full of examples of people being treated horribly. The millions of slaves who were worked to death in the mines or the victims of warlords who were slaughtered by them. One might believe people have some inherent value in some intangible manner.. but I don't see any real value that would give to such people and their horrible lives.

In my personal life I try to see the value in people but I am also very aware of the fact that I am constantly battling evolutionary hardwiring. We are a highly hierarchical species. Some being ugly, beautiful, poor, rich, dumb, intelligent, man or woman.. I do not see humanity ever assigning equal value to the human race at large (baring future genetic engineering).

These days there seems to be more of an effort into achieving such a thing, but I see so many evolutionary blind spots being acted out that it's pretty pathetic. Also that this frenzy will probably not last forever. People will eventually become tired of expending massive amounts of energy that is required to fight our natural urges and once we lose strength we'll quickly revert back to our natural selves.

I will say that the modern western world assigns more value in humanity than past civilizations, but I chalk that up more to technological advances which brought us increased safety and comfort. If society ever backslides on technological progress humanity will more and more start acting like our ancestors did. One thing I appreciate about many post apocalyptic stories, most of the time it acknowledges the returning tide of human nature.

 

[renniks]

What is the basis of human value? If one doesn't consider humans to be created in the image of God, which is often considered a basis for human value for some theists, what confers human value, if anything? There are a number of religious conceptions and non-religious conceptions possible here, I assume.

Do humans have inherent value? If so, how so? If not, why not?

Here are some possibilities that come to my mind, if we assume human value has no transcendent, metaphysical (inherent) basis, resting solely (if at all) on properties of being human:

A. All humans have value due to a conjunction of properties that all humans share, e.g. all humans are alive + all have potential to contribute to the common well-being + all care about their own well-being, etc. (The list of properties might be very different than these, but there are some properties that all humans share that confers value on the every member of the whole).

B. All humans have value because we value ourselves and by an act of empathy can see others as being similar, with similar wants and needs. (This would be something like the golden rule-treat others as you want to be treated-which seems to be ubiquitous among the world's religions and philosophies.)

C. Only some humans have value based on their peculiar set of properties. There are a couple possibilities here.
1. All humans of value share similar properties (intelligent + cooperative + contributes to the well-being of all + industrious). (These, again, could be very different, but all humans of value share similar properties. Also, those who don't share that set are not of value.)
2. Some humans are of value, but they might have radically different sets of value-conferring properties and they only have value in relation to some people. (For example, there are some people that have value according to me for various reasons. There is a different set that has value to you. Human value is idiosyncratic to the one who confers human value.)

I am sure there are other possibilities. And, it might be that some hold that no humans have value, which I would be really interested in hearing more about.

If one doesn't consider that humans are made in the image of God, then we are no more valuable than animals, which is pretty much what animal rightists believe, that a pig is a dog is a boy. Scary thought to me, that anyone can think that way.

 

[Ken-1122]

If one doesn't consider that humans are made in the image of God, then we are no more valuable than animals, which is pretty much what animal rightists believe, that a pig is a dog is a boy. Scary thought to me, that anyone can think that way.

I find it scary that someone would actually have the view that unless humans are made in the image of God, that we are somehow seen as having no more value than a pig or a dog.

 

[MehGuy]

I am sure there are other possibilities. And, it might be that some hold that no humans have value, which I would be really interested in hearing more about.

A psychopath (those without emotional empathy) might be the closest thing to what you may be describing. Although even they probably at least have value for themselves. Lol.

Although it depends what you mean by value and how trivial one wants to get with it. A sadist who is torturing someone will derive value from that person's humanity since it makes the consequences of their pain more vivid. Sadism is an expression of empathy. Likewise.. a slave owner who happens to also be a psychopath probably values their slaves in the sense of them being useful and as a commodity.

 

[renniks]

I find it scary that someone would actually have the view that unless humans are made in the image of God, that we are somehow seen as having no more value than a pig or a dog.

It's the logical conclusion. If evolution created us then we are just smart animals.

 

[dlamberth]

It's the logical conclusion. If evolution created us then we are just smart animals.

Not only smart, but self conscious to boot. Evolution is pretty creative in all sorts of ways.