Why Is This A Problem???

[durangodawood]

No, not at all. Car companies do the same calculation when deciding whether or not to have a recall for a known defect. The cost of the recall is measured against the value of the lives lost as measured in the car company's estimate of the court's probable awards to victims.

Does that mean that human life has a finite value? No. The court often relies on an economist's estimate of the income potential of the lost one to the beneficiary. Is the value of a human life merely a function of one's income potential? Sorry, that doesn't help your argument.

I'm not talking about lawsuit awards. I'm talking about how people themselves rate the value of lives against other finite values. It doesnt come up "infinite".

My sense is that "infintite value" is just a platitude because it explains nothing about how people actually behave. Show me any way we can tell that we value human lives infinitely.

 

[o_mlly]

You just claimed that my lack of belief in God could justify my actions. It couldn't be plainer.

o_mlly said: ↑
Sadly, you believe that this life is all there is so you can see circumstances that justify, in your mind, murder.​

No, it couldn't be plainer. In your mind, all things are possible. If one has no moral code then even deceit is good.

 

[o_mlly]

I'm not talking about lawsuit awards. I'm talking about how people themselves rate the value of lives against other finite values. It doesnt come up "infinite".

My sense is that "infintite value" is just a platitude because it explains nothing about how people actually behave. Show me any way we can tell that we value human lives infinitely.

How people behave? How do behaviors determine human value? Let's look at how Stalin behaved. How about Pol Pot? Or, of course, our "go to" guy on questions about morality, Adolf.

Show me one Western civilized legal/political system that does not exact the most stringent penalty for one who unjustly takes an innocent life.

 

[Bradskii]

o_mlly said: ↑
Sadly, you believe that this life is all there is so you can see circumstances that justify, in your mind, murder.​

No, it couldn't be plainer. In your mind, all things are possible. If one has no moral code then even deceit is good.

I guess it's tough to admit that you said it, even when I quoted you saying it. How does that work?

O: 'Show me where I said that'
B: 'Here'.
O: 'Ooh look. A pidgeon'

And highlighting 'in your mind'? Where do you think all this personal justification comes from? It's not like I get it from a book (see what I did there?).

 

[Bradskii]

How people behave? How do behaviors determine human value? Let's look at how Stalin behaved. How about Pol Pot? Or, of course, our "go to" guy on questions about morality, Adolf.

Well let me see. I'd say that they valued some lives less than others. I'd say that you value some lives more than others. I'd say that everybody does that. Are you the only person that doesn't realise that?

 

[o_mlly]

I guess it's tough to admit that you said it, even when I quoted you saying it. How does that work?

O: 'Show me where I said that'
B: 'Here'.
O: 'Ooh look. A pidgeon'

B: "I can't be bothered cutting and pasting quotes from others."
O: "Why's that?"
B: "It makes it so hard to strawman the other guy and, well, it would put outright deceit out of reach."

We're done.

 

[Bradskii]

B: "I can't be bothered cutting and pasting quotes from others."
O: "Why's that?"
B: "It makes it so hard to strawman the other guy and, well, it would put outright deceit out of reach."

We're done.

Darn. I was having fun.

 

[public hermit]

Your demand for a bright line is a distraction. Ive showed you why. And Ive showed you clearly how theres no evidence for an infinite value on human life. Thats plenty.

I agree with you.

This issue of humans being infinite in value keeps coming up so I think it's important to point out how strange it is for a Christian to make such a claim. I'm happy to be shown my mistake, but Christians generally hold there is only one entity of infinite value, i.e. God. Humans, by Christian definition, are created and thus finite. Even if we take into account that humans are created in the divine image, we still don't get more than one entity of infinite value. Presumably, even if we added all such images together, their conjunction would still be finite. So, humans, as valuable as they might be, are not of infinite value (for the Christian).

 

[durangodawood]

How people behave? How do behaviors determine human value? Let's look at how Stalin behaved. How about Pol Pot? Or, of course, our "go to" guy on questions about morality, Adolf.

Show me one Western civilized legal/political system that does not exact the most stringent penalty for one who unjustly takes an innocent life.

Behaviors are the best evidence we have for the value we place on anything, including human life. Everything else is just talk.

What do you think "value" even is? It's nothing more than the regard a conscious being has for something. If you think it is something else, please tell me what that would be.

 

[durangodawood]

I agree with you.

This issue of humans being infinite in value keeps coming up so I think it's important to point out how strange it is for a Christian to make such a claim. I'm happy to be shown my mistake, but Christians generally hold there is only one entity of infinite value, i.e. God. Humans, by Christian definition, are created and thus finite. Even if we take into account that humans are created in the divine image, we still don't get more than one entity of infinite value. Presumably, even if we added all such images together, their conjunction would still be finite. So, humans, as valuable as they might be, are not of infinite value (for the Christian).

Interesting Christian perspective. Do you think human life has infinite value for God? It doesn't seem like it at all, based on stories from the Bible.

 

[public hermit]

Interesting Christian perspective. Do you think human life has infinite value for God? It doesn't seem like it at all, based on stories from the Bible.

What does it mean to say a finite being has infinite value? At best, everlasting value, but not infinite.

Edit: I think value is going to be connected with persistence in being. A thing has value, to whatever extent, in so far as it persists in being (even memories fade). Finite creatures have value so long as they persist. God, being eternal, has unlimited value. Creatures can have everlasting value conferred, as all being is conferred, but can never have infinite value.

 

[durangodawood]

What does it mean to say a finite being has infinite value? At best, everlasting value, but not infinite.

I Don't think humans are capable of thinking or feeling in infinities anyway.

In post 389 I'm questioning what value itself is.

 

[durangodawood]

What does it mean to say a finite being has infinite value? At best, everlasting value, but not infinite.

Edit: I think value is going to be connected with persistence in being. A thing has value, to whatever extent, in so far as it persists in being (even memories fade). Finite creatures have value so long as they persist. God, being eternal, has unlimited value. Creatures can have everlasting value conferred, as all being is conferred, but can never have infinite value.

I think objects only have the value that a valuing subject confers upon them. It's a measure of that subject's regard. There is no such thing as intrinsic value. Valuing is an action of a heart or mind and is the only thing that makes value.

 

[RDKirk]

I think objects only have the value that a valuing subject confers upon them. It's a measure of that subject's regard. There is no such thing as intrinsic value. Valuing is an action of a heart or mind and is the only thing that makes value.

The value of Man:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. -- John 3:16

The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid again; and from joy over it he goes and sells everything that he has, and buys that field. -- Matthew 13

 

[public hermit]

I think objects only have the value that a valuing subject confers upon them. It's a measure of that subject's regard. There is no such thing as intrinsic value. Valuing is an action of a heart or mind and is the only thing that makes value.

I have some sympathy with this. Although, I would reject the subjective condition as being the definitive characteristic of value..

If we assume a universe with just one thing, and this one thing had no internal differentiation but was purely a simple, it would be valueless since it would have no other with which to compare. Where there is no relation there is no value.

This is the distinct difference between the Greek/Classical notion of God as a simple One and a Trinitarian conception where relation and value are eternally inherent.

Sorry for another edit: My point being the subjective condition can only obtain with an objective multiplicity. Yes, conscious agents evaluate, but they have something to work with that precedes the subjective evaluation.

 

[durangodawood]

The value of Man:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. -- John 3:16

The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid again; and from joy over it he goes and sells everything that he has, and buys that field. -- Matthew 13

Regarding value, that seems in accord with my thoughts which you quoted. God values the world exceedingly. A man values the kingdom of God above all material considerations.

 

[durangodawood]

I have some sympathy with this. Although, I would reject the subjective condition as being the definitive characteristic of value..

If we assume a universe with just one thing, and this one thing had no internal differentiation but was purely a simple, it would be valueless since it would have no other with which to compare. Where there is no relation there is no value.

This is the distinct difference between the Greek/Classical notion of God as a simple One and a Trinitarian conception where relation and value are eternally inherent.

Im struggling to imagine what value could even be apart from the regard of a valuer.

 

[public hermit]

Im struggling to imagine what value could even be apart from the regard of a valuer.

This is where my sympathies kick in because I agree. The regard for value is essential. If there is no perciever of relations, no evaluation is possible. What I was hoping to show is that objective differentiation precedes the regard, and without it regard for value is impossible. Perhaps that seems a brute fact, since we exist in a multiplicity for which we experience regard for value, but once we declare that value is purely subjective the existence of that multiplicity matters, I think. But more than that, relation grounds value more than subjective evaluations since such evaluations could not occur otherwise. What is the ground of value? It's not subjective regard but objective relation.

 

[partinobodycular]

Where there is no relation there is no value.

Yes, conscious agents evaluate, but they have something to work with that precedes the subjective evaluation.

But relationships don't equate to value. If one thing is tall and another is short, that's an objective relationship, but it tells you absolutely nothing about their value.

So even if the relationships are objective, the value is still subjective.

 

[public hermit]

But relationships don't equate to value. If one thing is tall and another is short, that's an objective relationship, but it tells you absolutely nothing about their value.

So even if the relationships are objective, the value is still subjective.

I agree in that if the relation is of import to a particular subject, it has value. Water has value in relation to the one who is thirsty, unlike the rock that has no thirst. And, thirsty people don't drink rocks. So, there is an objective relation that holds in order for thirsty people to value water in a way they don't value rocks. And, take away the water and the thirsty person dies. That relation is more than simply subjective regard.