Worth what ? More than What ? Less than what ? at achieving what ?
Something can only be worth more than something else if if can used to achieve a desired outcome more conveniently than the other.
Ambiguity is detrimental to being critically rational, making sense, conveying truth and understanding etc.
To put it bluntly, the question(s) are rather ‘stupid’ ones to ask unless it is for unmentioned psychological inquiry, if not the chance is your not serious critical thinker and are just looking for amusement in philosophy related disguise and/or in denial about your more philosophy related beliefs.
i’d say it depends on the person. You can’t say that like, Stephen Hawking is worth the same as a homeless person. What kind of people are you talking about? Union workers? People with PhDs? Children? Are there any actuaires on ILP that could help us out?
How much money would you demand in compensation if you were told that, say, a toxic chemical plant was being built in your backyard that would cause you to die ten years earlier than you otherwise would? Multiply this number by ten, and you have roughly the amount of money you think your life is worth.
This is relevant in the sense that the worth of a person’s life is generally relative to how much money they make (no coincidence, certainly) - i.e., a billionaire’s answer to the above is going to be quite different from someone who’s living in abject poverty. This is why you don’t see nuclear power plants being built in Beverly Hills.
Wow! Some shocking statements made here- are any of you followers of the Eugenics movement by any chance- YIKES!! Go Galtonians!!
Wow, the idea that one person would be worth more than another is appalling, ie, reference Hitler/Stalin for the ultimate in that train of thought. I thought Philosophers were smarter than that…?
Worth is a comparison, and there are a bazillion comparisons, so how can any comparison be correct? Just because a woman is a doctor, does not mean she’s the most important, and especially since there are elite people considered to be above her, and amongst the elite, there is the wealthiest few on the planet above them, and… so what? Aquisition ability constitutes as worth as a human being?? What about a destitute mother in Zamibia that ran all through the night to save a child, and where’s her value ranked among the revolting elite that organize mass slaughters of those same women and children? Value depends upon each person’s interpretation of comparisons, yet how do they really mean anything at all, when, if you ask anybody what their own value is, then they will tell you their own value is extremely high to them. That is what counts. When we each come here by ourselves really, and we leave by ourselves, really, then who gives a @@@@ about what anybody may value us at? I know my own interpretation of value is that the most powerful person on the planet is one who needs and is beholden to nothing, not the guy that has stolen a bazillion dollars from all the starving children of the world. I’ll take the swami in Tibet over any Bill Gates,… any day. Less is more!! The value is that they are alive, and there is no monetary value, regardless of what any lawyer or CEO says- in fact, even less so. So, no I don’t think OTHERS can place a value upon another. If you are important and valuable to yourself, then it is so- you are valuable to the only person that matters when it comes down to it. If you want to know how a person value shimself, ask him, and that is his true value.
I was thinking not monetary but, social contributions. A person that helps society is valuable to society.
Value is not just monetary. I like my big toe I value it, but, it has no monetary value, well unless I replace my nail with a solid gold toenail.(Hmmmm, I could start an interesting trend, naahh it sounds painful)
Can’t place real currency on human contributions. Thats impossible, although people do try.
I value any contributing member more than I value one that just leaches.
Contributions come in different ways. I could argue that criminals contribute to society, they do but, some people would argue against that.
I could argue that homeless contribute to society, Guess what? Some would argue against it ,even though it is the truth.
I’ve reproduced it here because not everyone follows links, but given how ugly the pdf->html conversion is, I’d recommend following the link to read it under the section “II.A Monism vs. Pluralism”
I also think this plays into the OP of the discussion – I do not think the value of human life is reducible to a financial metric. Not because life is in some way “invaluable” but because I am not an economic monist.
