I pick up my wisdom book and questions comes to me almost automatically. One of these questions: "what makes a human valuable?"
Then I begin to think for possible answers.
Maybe: a human that contribute to mankind, and makes life better and easier for his fellowmen is valuable.
It so, then: A person that does not contribute, should then be considered worthless? What can be considered as a contribution? Is it enough to try get a result, but fail, or is an actual result absolutely necessary?
If it is so; that a person must give a contribution if he is to be considered valuable, then I am according to a such definition nothing else than worthless. I am part of higher education, which in theory can make me valuable for my community in the future, but speculations about the future can never be science.
Maybe a different approach: a human that is valuable if himself or others consider him valuable, maybe of simple social reasons.
If so, then: a person is worthless if himself and others consider him worthless? Noone would want to be worthless, and he would, if noone considered him valuable, at least try to find a reason to consider himself valuable. If he found reason to consider himself valuable without a confirmation from others that it is their opinion too, how long would that last?
A last approach: A human is valuable regardless whether he himself or others think so.
I have read/heard: " All individuals are worth the same for God" (without argument) . If it was so, would it not be reasonable to expect that all humans, when their lives will end, agree to that the sum of all their experiences are worth just as much as the sum of anyone else experiences? Isn't reality more like this: A person who lived alone in Siberia would say that his experiences were worth less than a person who owned a house, had a family on a tropical island, and cultivated melons and cherries.
Immanuel Kant says that all humans are worth the same because they are purpose in themselves; everyone has free will to give themselves a norm for how to act. The argument "a person can give himself a norm for how to act", is enough to consider a person valuable? I would say that one can discuss that argument.
And then finally... Did i think of something that is worth writing down in my book? Is it possible to come to a conclusion for my questions? I am not sure, what does my blog readers think?
Innlegg
How do you know that the person living in Siberia would consider tropical standards superior? Maybe he has the time of his life, building snowmen and stuff.
SvarSlettIt seems like the topics you are touching upon resembles the topicis one would find in religion. In some religions all life is valuable. In india for instance, you could find a special hindu religion where it is a sin even to kill bugs. Therefor, in order to avoid killing bugs, people sweep the streets in front of them, or any place they sit. In most other parts of the world we would not place such a high value in bugs. So, what can we coclude with? You would probably agree that wether or not a human being is considered valuable depends on where you are and what religion you believe in. (Are women inferiour to men in the muslim world? Then you would probably argue that the enlightened human being has a wiew upon the matter wich is more correct and just. This leads to a paradox, because you are then placing a higher value in your (enlightened ) thaugts. But does it also mean that you feel more valuable than a muslim beating his wife? Probably..... To sum up; the value we place in others, and the value we place in our self meerly depends on the society in wich we are brought up and live in. This means that there is no universal answere to the question. The answere could only be seen in the context of your own society. A final thought wich you can contemplate for a minute or two about; a boy living in stockholm is a great sportsman. He can run faster than anyone in the entire city. Everybody treats him with respect and thinks he is valuable. Sponsors even pay him alot of money. He then moves to a poor willage in colombia. In this village they see no value in his running abilities. He can not even speak the language, so no one wants to hire him when he tries to get a job. He dies a poor man and nobody attends at his funeral. So, let's stop and think for a moment. Is there an equalety between not placing value in a persons abilities and not finding a person valuable?
SvarSlettThere must be at least a connection between the two. To feel valuable, is it not of great importance that somebody recognices your skills? Maybe not? Maybe it is enough to try to be the best person that you can be in order for someone (or even your self) to find you valuable. What about mentally disabled people? Or people who's got a decease that enables them from interakting with the soceity. Such individs can be found all over the world. If we did not place any value in them we would most likely kill them ( would you recomend an abortion if you knew your child would be born with downs syndrome?)? But then again, some parents in china do not place any value in having a baby girl ( or less value than a boy?) and leave the baby to die in the woods (or similar). Well then, if it was not prohibited by law, would more parents kill their mentally challenged child ( an absurd thaught?)? Maybe there is value in loving an other (human) being unconditionally, and maybe that is why all (human) beings must be considered valuable. In that case family and friends will always consider you valuable, no matter how much or little you contribute to society, and no matter how skilled you are.
SvarSlettBut consider a person without a family and no friends. Let's say that this person is a vegetable and just lie all day in bed in a institution. He can not talk and nurses need to feed him and change his diapers. Now the three questions emerges; 1) does this person think he is valuable ( granted that he has the ability to even think such thaughts)? 2) do other people find him valuable? 3) in general, will such a person always be considered valuable (or not), or should we just pull the plug (and kill him/her)? In some contries you could ask the doctor to take your life, or in the case where you were a vegetable, someone would make the decision for you. In the event that someone decides that you should die; do they not place any value in you? Given that the decision is not based on that you are in any physical pain, the answere must indeed be yes? So geirknappen, what could be the reasoning behind the killing of the lonly vegetable person? Not valuable or not able to live a valuable life?
SvarSlettHow about a poll;
SvarSlettwould you wish to take an abortion if you knew your child would not be born a normal healty child?
Comment; will people even be honest in this matter, or just say what is expected of them?
damn, that's somthing to think about on a saturday. It's som interssting thougts you have. I agree that it's difficult too come to a general conlution to your question. I think that the answer would be inividual for diferent persons, baced on their values.
SvarSlettGeir, du har noen ganske så tunge temaer i helgen?
SvarSlett"How do you know that the person living in Siberia would consider tropical standards superior? "
SvarSlett...Typical Geir- Yakobo-san dialouge. Just imagine a worse condition for the one living in Siberia, and a better condition for the one living on a tropical island. They meet and agree to that the tropical island-life must have been the best live, and the Siberia-life was the worst.
"In india for instance... ,,, In most other parts of the world we would not place such a high value in bugs."
SvarSlettMaybe my question should be "what makes an organism valuable? ", maybe "what makes anything valuable?"
"To sum up; the value we place in others, and the value we place in our self meerly depends on the society in wich we are brought up and live in."
So it is human opinion that determine whether a human is valuable or not? No universal answer means that no opinion is more valid than other opinions, If there were a group of 100 people, and 99 of them had the opinion that person A is more valuable than person B, and 1 of them had the opinion that person B is more valuable than person A. Is the opinion of the 1 person just as valid as the opinion of the 99? If all 100 of them agreed to that person A is more valuable than person B, is it then true that person B is less valuable?
"How about a poll?"
SvarSlettPeople like polls? Keep the poll-questions absurd, so that noone have to lie?
_____________________________________
All comments read... I have new hypothesis:
"All things can theoretically become valuable,although its potential value can not be discovered by our current resources/aids"