| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Abraxus
Forum Leader
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1914
Local time: 8:41 AM
|
 Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:55 am Post subject: |
  |
|
| Moloth wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | CET wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | If morals can be objective, so can the preciousness of life. If you're a moral relativist, then there's no point to this discussion. |
"Precious" is an assigned value.
Value, by definition, requires a comparison.
Therefore, there is no such thing as an objective value. |
There is no such thing as 'assigned value' without life. Therefore life, must be valuable or precious in itself. |
that does not follow. |
Why not? If value can only exist if assigned, the power to assign must therefore be of conceivable value in itself. Implying that there is perhaps no value to the power that lets you assign it in the first place is what does not follow.
_________________
~I'm waiting for the day when mankind will outgrow religion.
~My only regret is that I never left religion sooner.
Software Utilities Famous Philosopher Quotes (1:41, Divx 5, 8.8 MB) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
Ophis
Royal Citizen
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 470
Local time: 1:41 AM
Location: Manchester, UK
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Abraxus wrote: | | CET wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | If morals can be objective, so can the preciousness of life. If you're a moral relativist, then there's no point to this discussion. |
"Precious" is an assigned value.
Value, by definition, requires a comparison.
Therefore, there is no such thing as an objective value. |
There is no such thing as 'assigned value' without life. Therefore life, must be valuable or precious in itself. |
That assumes we value the ability to make judgements of value. We might not.
Anyway, you only need one life for value judgements. I could kill the entire human race apart from one person and there could still be assigned value. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abraxus
Forum Leader
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1914
Local time: 8:41 AM
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 6:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ophis wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | CET wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | If morals can be objective, so can the preciousness of life. If you're a moral relativist, then there's no point to this discussion. |
"Precious" is an assigned value.
Value, by definition, requires a comparison.
Therefore, there is no such thing as an objective value. |
There is no such thing as 'assigned value' without life. Therefore life, must be valuable or precious in itself. |
That assumes we value the ability to make judgements of value. We might not. |
Of course we do. Don't you find even your subjective valuations useful?
| Quote: |
Anyway, you only need one life for value judgements. I could kill the entire human race apart from one person and there could still be assigned value. |
Still, you need life, even if it's just one. That's why life is objectively precious.
_________________
~I'm waiting for the day when mankind will outgrow religion.
~My only regret is that I never left religion sooner.
Software Utilities Famous Philosopher Quotes (1:41, Divx 5, 8.8 MB) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ophis
Royal Citizen
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 470
Local time: 1:41 AM
Location: Manchester, UK
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 6:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Abraxus wrote: | | Ophis wrote: | | That assumes we value the ability to make judgements of value. We might not. |
Of course we do. Don't you find even your subjective valuations useful? |
I do. That doesn't mean everyone does.
| Abraxus wrote: | | Quote: |
Anyway, you only need one life for value judgements. I could kill the entire human race apart from one person and there could still be assigned value. |
Still, you need life, even if it's just one. That's why life is objectively precious. |
But even if I were to accept your reasoning, the individual life would have no objective worth. There would still be no problem with the occasional genocide as long as I didn't destroy the whole human race. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abraxus
Forum Leader
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1914
Local time: 8:41 AM
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 6:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ophis wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | Ophis wrote: | | That assumes we value the ability to make judgements of value. We might not. |
Of course we do. Don't you find even your subjective valuations useful? |
I do. That doesn't mean everyone does. |
Everyone doesn't need to. You're conflating 'objective' with 'absolute'.
| Abraxus wrote: | | Quote: | | Quote: |
Anyway, you only need one life for value judgements. I could kill the entire human race apart from one person and there could still be assigned value. |
Still, you need life, even if it's just one. That's why life is objectively precious. |
But even if I were to accept your reasoning, the individual life would have no objective worth. There would still be no problem with the occasional genocide as long as I didn't destroy the whole human race. |
If you thought committing genocide was okay, then there's a problem with you rather than with life being objectively precious. Once again, I think you're confusing objectivity with absolutism.
_________________
~I'm waiting for the day when mankind will outgrow religion.
~My only regret is that I never left religion sooner.
Software Utilities Famous Philosopher Quotes (1:41, Divx 5, 8.8 MB) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CET
The Spiritual Atheist
Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12842
Local time: 4:41 PM
Location: SoCal, USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moloth wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | CET wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | If morals can be objective, so can the preciousness of life. If you're a moral relativist, then there's no point to this discussion. |
"Precious" is an assigned value.
Value, by definition, requires a comparison.
Therefore, there is no such thing as an objective value. |
There is no such thing as 'assigned value' without life. Therefore life, must be valuable or precious in itself. |
that does not follow. |
I was about to say that.
_________________
Namaste,
CET 
The Spiritual Atheist
"Much of the suffering in the world comes from the delusion that we are separate from one another." - Gautama Buddha
"Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music." - George Carlin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CET
The Spiritual Atheist
Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12842
Local time: 4:41 PM
Location: SoCal, USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Abraxus wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | CET wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | If morals can be objective, so can the preciousness of life. If you're a moral relativist, then there's no point to this discussion. |
"Precious" is an assigned value.
Value, by definition, requires a comparison.
Therefore, there is no such thing as an objective value. |
There is no such thing as 'assigned value' without life. Therefore life, must be valuable or precious in itself. |
that does not follow. |
Why not? If value can only exist if assigned, the power to assign must therefore be of conceivable value in itself. Implying that there is perhaps no value to the power that lets you assign it in the first place is what does not follow. |
Then value REQUIRES judgment by a sentient life.
Without that sentient life, there would be no value.
Sentient life assigns value based on how something helps to increase or decrease survivability, or replication. Changes in survivability, or replication change what is valuable.
A different sentient life form would set different values based on different variables of survivability, and replication.
Therefore value is subjective and cannot be objective based on changing variables of survivability and replication.
_________________
Namaste,
CET
The Spiritual Atheist
"Much of the suffering in the world comes from the delusion that we are separate from one another." - Gautama Buddha
"Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music." - George Carlin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 23071
Local time: 7:41 PM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
diamonds require coal to exist.
does this mean that coal itself is (nearly as) valuable?
I still do not understand the leap you're taking, Abraxas... i mean, i kinda see what you mean, but its just not bridging the gap for me.
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abraxus
Forum Leader
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1914
Local time: 8:41 AM
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moloth wrote: | diamonds require coal to exist.
does this mean that coal itself is (nearly as) valuable?
I still do not understand the leap you're taking, Abraxas... i mean, i kinda see what you mean, but its just not bridging the gap for me. |
It's how you look at it. Without coal, there are no diamonds. What I don't understand is all this debate about the value of life. It's not like you don't think life is valuable.
_________________
~I'm waiting for the day when mankind will outgrow religion.
~My only regret is that I never left religion sooner.
Software Utilities Famous Philosopher Quotes (1:41, Divx 5, 8.8 MB) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 23071
Local time: 7:41 PM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Abraxus wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | diamonds require coal to exist.
does this mean that coal itself is (nearly as) valuable?
I still do not understand the leap you're taking, Abraxas... i mean, i kinda see what you mean, but its just not bridging the gap for me. |
It's how you look at it. Without coal, there are no diamonds. What I don't understand is all this debate about the value of life. It's not like you don't think life is valuable. |
thats not the point, though. some of us simply recognize the fact that our own value placements are subjective. i'm okay knowing that my values, my morals and my sense of right and wrong are simply concepts with no objective reality to 'prove' them right or wrong.
yeah, i THINK life is valuable... but i can't point to some objective source and say, "see? its true beyond my own opinion."
..just in the same way i think chocolate tastes good, i can't say that "tasting good" is an objective property of the chocolate.. i have ASSIGNED that value TO it from my own subjective perspective. it only tastes good, to me, because i have decided that it does.
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abraxus
Forum Leader
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1914
Local time: 8:41 AM
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CET wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | CET wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | If morals can be objective, so can the preciousness of life. If you're a moral relativist, then there's no point to this discussion. |
"Precious" is an assigned value.
Value, by definition, requires a comparison.
Therefore, there is no such thing as an objective value. |
There is no such thing as 'assigned value' without life. Therefore life, must be valuable or precious in itself. |
that does not follow. |
Why not? If value can only exist if assigned, the power to assign must therefore be of conceivable value in itself. Implying that there is perhaps no value to the power that lets you assign it in the first place is what does not follow. |
Then value REQUIRES judgment by a sentient life.
Without that sentient life, there would be no value.
Sentient life assigns value based on how something helps to increase or decrease survivability, or replication. Changes in survivability, or replication change what is valuable.
A different sentient life form would set different values based on different variables of survivability, and replication.
Therefore value is subjective and cannot be objective based on changing variables of survivability and replication. |
It's ironic you keep mentioning the association of value and 'survivability' when life just so happens to be a prerequisite to 'survivability'. Shift your focus from the word 'value' to 'life' and it's easier to see the value of life. 
_________________
~I'm waiting for the day when mankind will outgrow religion.
~My only regret is that I never left religion sooner.
Software Utilities Famous Philosopher Quotes (1:41, Divx 5, 8.8 MB) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abraxus
Forum Leader
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1914
Local time: 8:41 AM
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moloth wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | diamonds require coal to exist.
does this mean that coal itself is (nearly as) valuable?
I still do not understand the leap you're taking, Abraxas... i mean, i kinda see what you mean, but its just not bridging the gap for me. |
It's how you look at it. Without coal, there are no diamonds. What I don't understand is all this debate about the value of life. It's not like you don't think life is valuable. |
thats not the point, though. some of us simply recognize the fact that our own value placements are subjective. i'm okay knowing that my values, my morals and my sense of right and wrong are simply concepts with no objective reality to 'prove' them right or wrong.
yeah, i THINK life is valuable... but i can't point to some objective source and say, "see? its true beyond my own opinion."
..just in the same way i think chocolate tastes good, i can't say that "tasting good" is an objective property of the chocolate.. i have ASSIGNED that value TO it from my own subjective perspective. it only tastes good, to me, because i have decided that it does. |
How can say raping little girls ever be 'good'? Is it not objectively something one should avoid?
_________________
~I'm waiting for the day when mankind will outgrow religion.
~My only regret is that I never left religion sooner.
Software Utilities Famous Philosopher Quotes (1:41, Divx 5, 8.8 MB) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CET
The Spiritual Atheist
Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12842
Local time: 4:41 PM
Location: SoCal, USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Abraxus wrote: | | CET wrote: | Then value REQUIRES judgment by a sentient life.
Without that sentient life, there would be no value.
Sentient life assigns value based on how something helps to increase or decrease survivability, or replication. Changes in survivability, or replication change what is valuable.
A different sentient life form would set different values based on different variables of survivability, and replication.
Therefore value is subjective and cannot be objective based on changing variables of survivability and replication. |
It's ironic you keep mentioning the association of value and 'survivability' when life just so happens to be a prerequisite to 'survivability'. Shift your focus from the word 'value' to 'life' and it's easier to see the value of life. |
I would suggest flipping that. Survivability is a prerequisite to life. For that matter, survivability and replication are both prerequisites to life.
_________________
Namaste,
CET
The Spiritual Atheist
"Much of the suffering in the world comes from the delusion that we are separate from one another." - Gautama Buddha
"Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music." - George Carlin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 23071
Local time: 7:41 PM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Abraxus wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | | Abraxus wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | diamonds require coal to exist.
does this mean that coal itself is (nearly as) valuable?
I still do not understand the leap you're taking, Abraxas... i mean, i kinda see what you mean, but its just not bridging the gap for me. |
It's how you look at it. Without coal, there are no diamonds. What I don't understand is all this debate about the value of life. It's not like you don't think life is valuable. |
thats not the point, though. some of us simply recognize the fact that our own value placements are subjective. i'm okay knowing that my values, my morals and my sense of right and wrong are simply concepts with no objective reality to 'prove' them right or wrong.
yeah, i THINK life is valuable... but i can't point to some objective source and say, "see? its true beyond my own opinion."
..just in the same way i think chocolate tastes good, i can't say that "tasting good" is an objective property of the chocolate.. i have ASSIGNED that value TO it from my own subjective perspective. it only tastes good, to me, because i have decided that it does. |
How can say raping little girls ever be 'good'? Is it not objectively something one should avoid? |
what if the choice is "rape the girl, or we will set off a nuke in NYC that will kill/injure millions of people?
hm.. which one would suddenly be moral?
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gerard
Nemesis (archly so)
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 3995
Local time: 12:41 AM
Location: Groningen, the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We value life because we are alive. We value not hurting people because we can be hurt too. We are the measure of the moral values we hold and some of them are pretty straightforward. If you want to call that absolute, well go ahead. But the measure is not outside or greater than we are as living beings ourselves I think.
Gerard
_________________
The Historical Atlas of Europe
But as man exists in nature, I am not authorized to say that his formation, is above the power of nature.
Paul Henri Thiry Baron d' Holbach, (1723-1789)
Not collecting stamps is my hobby.
Gerard, (1962-*) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
