Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I think 'C' is regnant, and probably has dominated over most of history
We're really good at devaluing others.I didn't think about it that way, but I think that might be right. In practice, humans can have a tendency to see some as having value and some as not, either because they think humans of value exhibit certain properties or because of there own idiosyncrasies.
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.
An interesting (and crucial) corollary for Christians: love is vastly more helpful than mere preaching against whatever sins we wish others would not do
An interesting (and crucial) corollary for Christians: love is vastly more helpful than mere preaching against whatever sins we wish others would not do.
I agree with this too. Love for our fellows is a universal feature of human societies, not confined to the religious.
I read, and I believe it to be true, is that among all of the live forms on Earth, it's we Human Beings that are effected by Love the most.I agree with this too. Love for our fellows is a universal feature of human societies, not confined to the religious.
Yeah, that is a loaded question. Of value to whom? There is no intrinsic value. A valuer requires a valuer and something to value. Therefore value rests in the relationship between a human mind and something in reality. It rests between some subject of consciousness and some object of consciousness. Value is not in the object apart from the subject and it is not in the subject apart from the object. Hence, the basis of moral values is the primacy of existence principle.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.
You are expecting humans to value each other, that has not proven to be typical human behavior. Unfortunately what has been typical is looking for differences of any kind and then diminishing the value of those who have differences of any kind. These differences have been sex, family line, skin color, wealth, religion, geographic location, educational level, political views and on and on. It seems that many humans are only happy when they feel superior to someone else. I believe that when we narrow everything down to you and I were both made in the image of God and disregard all of the other differences we have the best opportunity to accept and love each other.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.
Yeah, that is a loaded question. Of value to whom? There is no intrinsic value. A valuer requires a valuer and something to value. Therefore value rests in the relationship between a human mind and something in reality. It rests between some subject of consciousness and some object of consciousness. Value is not in the object apart from the subject and it is not in the subject apart from the object. Hence, the basis of moral values is the primacy of existence principle.
How can anything just "have value"? Value is essentially a verb. A valuer does it. The noun form only follows from the action.It looks like C2 is what you're looking for, or something similar.
How can anything just "have value"? Value is essentially a verb. A valuer does it. The noun form only follows from the action.
How can a thing "have value" if no one values it?
I guess I dont see how value as a verb implies it must be idiosyncratic (C). Generic valuing of other humans could well be ubiquitously hard wired, as in natural empathy, or drummed into us via religion of other indoctrination.Well, exactly. The assumption of A through C is that value is being conferred or at least picked out according to what is valued, it's not inherent. We, the subjects, pick out properties of others that we value. If these values are not shared by multiple persons then we're left with C2, where value is solely based on idiosyncratic differences.
I think it's important to define what a value is. A value is something that we act to gain or keep because it supports our life or adds to the enjoyment of our life. I value my life, therefore I act to gain or keep it. I value others if they share my values. I look for people to have relationships with who are honest, trustworthy, intelligent, productive, creative, make good conversation, are just fun to be around. I seek to avoid people who are toxic, gossip, are not trustworthy, racist, irrational, and just not fun to be around. If value requires a valuer then there's no problem because I can be that valuer.It looks like C2 is what you're looking for, or something similar.
I guess I dont see how value as a verb implies it must be idiosyncratic (C). Generic valuing of other humans could well be ubiquitously hard wired, as in natural empathy, or drummed into us via religion of other indoctrination.
I think it's important to define what a value is. A value is something that we act to gain or keep because it supports our life or adds to the enjoyment of our life. I value my life, therefore I act to gain or keep it. I value others if they share my values. I look for people to have relationships with who are honest, trustworthy, intelligent, productive, creative, make good conversation, are just fun to be around. I seek to avoid people who are toxic, gossip, are not trustworthy, racist, irrational, and just not fun to be around. If value requires a valuer then there's no problem because I can be that valuer.
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.Yes, you are the valuer. And you have listed a set of properties that, to you, others exhibit that you value (based on the fact you value your life), e.g. honesty, trustworthiness, etc. And you listed properties others exhibit that you don't value, e.g. racist, irrational, etc.
You don't seem to hold that humans have value to you simply because they're human. Human value is not inherent, nor are some value making properties shared by all humans, so that you would say all humans have value. Or, maybe you would. Do you think all humans are valuable or have value in relation to you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?