What gives human life inherent value?

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Human life is important to us, because we're human. Altruistic behaviour helps our DNA to be passed on, and all we basically are is machines DNA uses to replicate itself. Therefore we care about each other.

Attach whatever meaning you want to that.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Measure one human life against the Universe.

 

[Pup]

I think the question needs to be split in two: What makes humans value their lives and in what way do humans add value to the world?

Exactly. Most (though of course not all) humans feel that human life is valuable, not because it actually is, but because those who didn't have that feeling were less apt to survive and reproduce.

As far as the value humans actually have, the question is, to whom or what? If one can specify a goal, it's easier to decide whether humans add or detract toward achieving that goal. Are humans valuable to the survival of dogs, cats and Norway rats? Yes. Were humans valuable to the passenger pigeon and the dodo? Nope. Is the goal of the universe to have conscious entities contemplating it? If yes, humans are valuable. If the universe has no goal or has a different goal, humans may have no value at all.

None of that changes the fact, though, that we've been bred to believe we're valuable and to try to explain why we feel that way.

 

[Seismosaurus]

There's no such thing as "inherent" value. Value is a subjective assessment; lives, like anything, are only valuable to somebody.

 

[gentlehorse]

It is better to exist than to not exist. Therein lies your inherent value. 5 cents, please.

 

[I Ratant]

It is different to exist, not better.
Non-existence is not perceptible at all.

 

[blutoski]

Sometimes I ponder this question and am left lapping at the dried remains of the tautology that life has whatever value we give it, or that the meaning of life is to live. Is there something more that attributes worth to each individual human life? Or is it all floating debris and lies?

If I were religious, I might say that God gives life value. We are each God's creation and therefore that makes life a sacred gift. However, God doesn't exist, or at least doesn't care to show any evidence that he does, and if he exists, he shows a remarkable disdain for human life. If we equate fate and natural occurrences with God, then humans are often the victims of God's jealousy, wrath, and vindictiveness. So God can't be the answer.

Do our attachments to others give life value? Perhaps my friends and loved ones are what make my life important. Maybe my influence on them, especially younger generations of my family, is what matters most. If my life were to end, it would not be without consequence, as those who are attached to me would suffer emotional trauma and ask, "Why?" However, this is assuming I'm a positive influence on others in the first place. I seek no relationships because I have no wish to drag others into my life. The loss of one person can't affect all that many; tragedies and death occur all the time, and yet people move on with their lives. Also, many despicable people throughout history, such as criminals and evil dictators, had friends and loved ones. So attachments can't be the answer.

Does the role humans play in nature give human life value? Humans are a unique species to say the least, with the most complex tools and languages. We have built great civilizations, invented amazing things, created works of art, music, and poetry, and discovered more about the universe than any other species on Earth. We are highly intelligent, widespread, and adaptable. However, we've also wreaked immense damage on the environment, driven species to extinction, and have polluted the Earth to the point where it may take generations to clean up the mess we've made. So it's hard to say that humans are the pinnacle of life on Earth. We might just be another evolutionary blip or failed experiment.

I ask, where does that leave me?

Please understand that I'm searching for an answer for my own sake. I don't wish to imply that other people's lives are somehow worth less just because I'm too stubborn or shortsighted to see things as they do. I'm asking in all sincerity.

Understood. And you're in good company.

If you're posting because you're moody and looking for a boost, I can warn you here and now this is not the time to read any Camus.

My answer is similar to many above: value is assigned, not inherent. Assign value to life and it is valuable. Human life seems more valuable than others, because we are aware of it.

Rachels built a moral philosophy on this: the 'piece' of other animals' lives that resembles human life gives them some value, too. Dogs are loyal. Cats are curious. "[If a pig had personality, he'd cease to be a filthy animal.]" St. Francis of Assizi thought it meant they have souls. Spinoza thought they had a spark of the creator. As an atheist, I'm sure they have a common ancestor, and that it's my privilege to expand the sphere of valued life to them, too.

ETA: (Next up: cat pix.)

 

[wrs]

It is better to exist than to not exist. Therein lies your inherent value. 5 cents, please.

Evidence please.

 

[gentlehorse]

Evidence please.

The sage tells us:

Non-existence is not perceptible at all.

He is, of course, correct.

I submit that it is better to exist than to not exist because non-existence precludes the possibility of perceiving chocolate, sex, puppybreath, sunrise, twoo love, Homer hitting himself in the eye with a hammer, your child's first step, the Cubs, etc. YMMV.

ETA: 5 cents, please--

So serious--

 

[Frozenwolf150]

Thank you for the thoughtful responses.

I have a tendency to dehumanize myself. I often feel that being human and living out human wants, needs, and vices is offensive. I dislike the thought of having to consume resources to survive, let alone to carry out my daily activities. It disgusts me to have to eat perfectly good food and convert it to waste. I feel like a burden on others because of my disability, and on the environment because of the survival necessities of being human. I suppose I feel that if I were less than human, it would mollify this sense of guilt.

Were this the case though, would I be here asking these questions? Would I even be able to comprehend them? I can only imagine it would be all the more frustrating to have the slightest inkling of these concepts but lack the words or capacity to express them as I have. I wouldn't wish that on myself or anyone else.

Several of you have brought up the fact that humans evolved to attribute value to human life, because it's necessary for the survival of our species. I can't argue with that. It's as essential as eating and breathing. If you don't believe it and justify it, you might as well not exist. However, this is precisely the problem I have. I can't just adhere to a belief for no apparent reason. It seems like a circular argument to me to say that human life has value because we give it value. It's similar to how religious thinking may have an adaptive purpose and confer a survival advantage, yet have no rational basis.

I suppose this rational basis is what I'm looking for. Have humans really done more good than harm to each other? Have we done more good than harm to the environment? Would it be a good thing if we one day spread across the universe?

It's a strange time in our history to be alive right now, on the cusp of so many radical social changes and technological innovations, that it's hard to tell which direction humanity is moving. I just hope it's the right direction.

 

[Wolfman]

As an atheist, I see two possible answers to this question. The first is, simply, "nothing". We are accidents of evolution, there is no 'purpose' or 'goal' in the universe in having us exist. There is no "inherent" value to our lives, if by that you mean a value determined from or derived from something outside of ourselves.

The other answer is "The inherent value of our lives is determined or defined by us". Lacking any external source from which to derive our value, it is up to us to define it.

From a very pragmatic viewpoint, we can argue that evolution is a natural process, of which we are a result. We exist because we have survived and evolved to become who we are; and our value consists of continuing simply to exist. Failure of humanity to exist would indicate that we have failed from an evolutionary viewpoint, and thus no longer have value.

From a more philosophical viewpoint (and this is the viewpoint towards which I tend), our "value" is determined by ourselves. There isn't any "inherent" or "intrinsic" value, but rather we determine for ourselves what value we have.

For me, as a Humanist, my "value" is determined essentially by my ability to contribute in a positive manner to humanity. Whether this be helping individuals, or large groups, it's all got 'value'. The more people I'm able to help, the greater the value of my life.

Others, I'm sure, will have other criteria. I don't think there can be any 'absolute' answer to this question, there is no one 'right' answer; it will vary from person to person, from case to case. Another answer, already given above, is that our ability to ask that question is what gives us value; no other living creature on the planet asks that question, it is what sets us apart.

The only answer that I disagree with is the "our lives have no value" one; in the end, from a very logical perspective, it may be true -- but it results in a life of pointless desperation. If it is true that our lives have no purpose, then it can't possibly hurt to create our own purpose...and thereby make our own lives, and the lives of others, more happy and fulfilling during our brief sojourn on this mortal coil.

 

[Brainache]

Thank you for the thoughtful responses.

I have a tendency to dehumanize myself. I often feel that being human and living out human wants, needs, and vices is offensive. I dislike the thought of having to consume resources to survive, let alone to carry out my daily activities. It disgusts me to have to eat perfectly good food and convert it to waste. I feel like a burden on others because of my disability, and on the environment because of the survival necessities of being human. I suppose I feel that if I were less than human, it would mollify this sense of guilt.

Were this the case though, would I be here asking these questions? Would I even be able to comprehend them? I can only imagine it would be all the more frustrating to have the slightest inkling of these concepts but lack the words or capacity to express them as I have. I wouldn't wish that on myself or anyone else.

Several of you have brought up the fact that humans evolved to attribute value to human life, because it's necessary for the survival of our species. I can't argue with that. It's as essential as eating and breathing. If you don't believe it and justify it, you might as well not exist. However, this is precisely the problem I have. I can't just adhere to a belief for no apparent reason. It seems like a circular argument to me to say that human life has value because we give it value. It's similar to how religious thinking may have an adaptive purpose and confer a survival advantage, yet have no rational basis.

I suppose this rational basis is what I'm looking for. Have humans really done more good than harm to each other? Have we done more good than harm to the environment? Would it be a good thing if we one day spread across the universe?

It's a strange time in our history to be alive right now, on the cusp of so many radical social changes and technological innovations, that it's hard to tell which direction humanity is moving. I just hope it's the right direction.

You know, I believe it is possible for people to drive themselves a bit mad by obsessing over questions like this. At the end of the day, what does it matter?

Life either has value or it doesn't. We may never know. Big Whoopee.

Now live your life, or not.

The choice is yours.

 

[gentlehorse]

Thank you for the thoughtful responses.

I have a tendency to dehumanize myself. I often feel that being human and living out human wants, needs, and vices is offensive. I dislike the thought of having to consume resources to survive, let alone to carry out my daily activities. It disgusts me to have to eat perfectly good food and convert it to waste. I feel like a burden on others because of my disability, and on the environment because of the survival necessities of being human. I suppose I feel that if I were less than human, it would mollify this sense of guilt.

I have not read much of your stuff. My heart goes out to you and I wish I could reach into your head and throw a switch that would change your perspective and internal dialogue. That said, I'm going to suggest that you see an MD and tell him/her exactly what you said above.

 

[Wolfman]

FrozenWolf,

The question you are asking is one I struggled with when I first rejected Christianity, and became an atheist. So let me share my own thought process with you, how I resolved this question for myself.

I began with the basic conclusion that humanity in general has value, that the continued existence of humanity is a good thing. There is no objective criteria for this belief, no absolute proof, nothing like that. Rather, it is predicated on the simple fact that if I conclude humanity has no value, then my existence, and the existence of everyone I know, is pointless...and we might as well just go out and kill ourselves. Humanity has value simply because my existence demands that it have value.

Once that step is taken, then my next step is the conclusion that the happier and more fulfilling my existence is, the better it is for me. This is predicated on the simple (and, I believe, defensible) belief that a happy, fulfilling life is highly preferable to an unhappy, unfulfilling one.

My third step is the argument that the best way to ensure my own happiness and fulfillment is to work to promote a society/environment in which as many people as possible have the opportunity for happy, fulfilling lives. This is simply a numbers game -- the higher the percentage of people who have the opportunity for happiness and fulfillment, the greater the chance that I will have those things for myself.

Thus, the more I do to promote and encourage a society where the greatest number of people have the opportunity for happiness and fulfillment, the greater my own opportunity for happiness and fulfillment will be. The greater my own happiness and fulfillment are, the better my own life will be.

Is there any grand "purpose" or "design" that my own life, or the life of others, should be happy or fulfilling? Of course not. But putting aside "purpose", I still have "choice". And I prefer to choose a philosophy that gives me the opportunity for happiness and fulfillment, even if there's no greater "purpose" to it. I'm alive, and I'm self-aware. Seems to me, I can either give up and kill myself now; or I can do my best to make my life, and the lives of those around me, as happy and fulfilling as possible.


Disclaimer -- I'm very careful to use the words opportunity for happiness and fulfillment; there are many who, even given such an opportunity, may reject it, or fail to take it. And every person, regardless of how wonderful their lives may be, will still face periods of pain, difficulty, suffering, etc. I'm not preaching utopia; it's not my responsibility to make people happy, and I don't believe we'll ever reach a state where happiness and fulfillment are universal.

 

[blutoski]

Thank you for the thoughtful responses.

I have a tendency to dehumanize myself. I often feel that being human and living out human wants, needs, and vices is offensive. I dislike the thought of having to consume resources to survive, let alone to carry out my daily activities. It disgusts me to have to eat perfectly good food and convert it to waste. I feel like a burden on others because of my disability, and on the environment because of the survival necessities of being human. I suppose I feel that if I were less than human, it would mollify this sense of guilt.

Were this the case though, would I be here asking these questions? Would I even be able to comprehend them? I can only imagine it would be all the more frustrating to have the slightest inkling of these concepts but lack the words or capacity to express them as I have. I wouldn't wish that on myself or anyone else.

Several of you have brought up the fact that humans evolved to attribute value to human life, because it's necessary for the survival of our species. I can't argue with that. It's as essential as eating and breathing. If you don't believe it and justify it, you might as well not exist. However, this is precisely the problem I have. I can't just adhere to a belief for no apparent reason. It seems like a circular argument to me to say that human life has value because we give it value. It's similar to how religious thinking may have an adaptive purpose and confer a survival advantage, yet have no rational basis.

I suppose this rational basis is what I'm looking for. Have humans really done more good than harm to each other? Have we done more good than harm to the environment? Would it be a good thing if we one day spread across the universe?

It's a strange time in our history to be alive right now, on the cusp of so many radical social changes and technological innovations, that it's hard to tell which direction humanity is moving. I just hope it's the right direction.

All good questions, suitable for both sober and chemically-fuelled contemplation.

My short-term prescription is to put the questions into two buckets: what are humans going to do... and what am I going to do. I have a lot of control over the latter: now, later, tomorrow, next month, next year, in my lifetime. I find that if I can achieve some of my personal goals (which include volunteering time to help those who are less fortunate) I sleep well, and am less concerned about humanity's destiny.

I realized that even if we expand into the universe, we are not invaders, we are linked to every part of it because we are an emergent property of the composing matter. Leaving Earth is not the start of an infinite journey. We will eventually die out. We will make misery and delight. Genocide, but probably create new species too. And eventually none will remember us anyway. So don't take ownership of that.

I wrote these thoughts down in a journal. I suggest you try it. You can go back in a year and see if you've changed.

 

[blutoski]

You know, I believe it is possible for people to drive themselves a bit mad by obsessing over questions like this. At the end of the day, what does it matter

Agreed. I repeat my warning about Camus.

 

[gentlehorse]

The only answer that I disagree with is the "our lives have no value" one; in the end, from a very logical perspective, it may be true -- but it results in a life of pointless desperation.

Agreed. If the nihilist has cornered the market on the TRVTH, I choose a smile and a fresh-off-the-griddle Reuben sandwich over a life devoted to wallowing in bankrupt morbidity.

 

[383LQ4SS]

Thank you for the thoughtful responses.

I have a tendency to dehumanize myself. I often feel that being human and living out human wants, needs, and vices is offensive. I dislike the thought of having to consume resources to survive, let alone to carry out my daily activities. It disgusts me to have to eat perfectly good food and convert it to waste. I feel like a burden on others because of my disability, and on the environment because of the survival necessities of being human. I suppose I feel that if I were less than human, it would mollify this sense of guilt.

Well...my answer was that there is no inherent value and even assigning value doesn't give it value. If we assign value...what is the value in that?

However...this outlook regarding this topic also negates much of the adjectives you use above. If there is no inherent human value...then the human wants, needs and vices you mention above also are not truly offensive. Eating and converting things to another form...simple mechanisms at work with no inherent negative aspects. And finally if humans have no inherent value...rendering yourself "less than human" is a pointless exercise as well. Just not necessary to do that because no value can be gained or lost through that action. You are still right where you were and no blame need be assigned, no guilt need be felt.

So if value is out the window..why I am relatively happy? Who knows. But I am pretty sure the answer lay in the natural mechanisms and conditions that led to us conscious creatures existing in the first place. These mechanisms and conditions do currently have a general marching direction in regards to life and conscious life and darn near provide a purpose. Its my consciousness of these mechanisms where I can assign myself some type of purpose. I assign this purpose even if the arrangement of mechanisms and conditions in our local chapter of this universe turn out to be temporary.

You might say I am trading "value" for "purpose". But I dont think so. The purpose is just an extension of what this conscious creature observes to be occurring as far as evolution, entropy, statistical dynamics, physics etc. And the observation of what these mechanisms are in fact doing informs the potential direction of my actions.

In other words...I have no idea

 

[HansMustermann]

What gives human life value is that humans are doing the evaluation of that value, pretty much.

For a start, we have built in empathy.

Second, well, most human rules and laws and morals are really social contracts. I don't want to die, you don't want to die, so basically we make a pact to not kill each other, and to provide some mutual defense against those who don't quite adhere to that pact.

Probably the most obvious evidence of that is that basically such contracts historically only covered those in a position to enter them. Everyone else was included only in as much as those having the power valued their property.

E.g., since we're talking the value of life, most ancient cultures were not particularly fussed about the life of a slave.

 

[Arcade22]

I have never seen a coherent argument as to why anything has "inherent value" as value is always in practice something given and assigned by something or someone to something else. "God gives human life value", "Nature gives human life value", "reason gives human life value", "logic dictates that human life has value" and so on.