01 Jun '16 17:57>
If you hold the view that life evolved from a chemical soup, does life have any value? Is it sacred?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkSacred is a religious term [or one with deep religious connotations] which is not really appropriate.
If you hold the view that life evolved from a chemical soup, does life have any value? Is it sacred?
Originally posted by googlefudgeLet me rephrase the question, do human have intrinsic value greater than that of other life forms?
Sacred is a religious term [or one with deep religious connotations] which is not really appropriate.
So let's just stick with "does life have any value?"
To which the short answer is "of course it does, duh" 🙄
It has value to us, we are complex social creatures with empathy that care about others.
We have thus created a myriad of moral and et ...[text shortened]... ake good moral and ethical judgements and not whether
you should make them in the first place.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkHumans have the capacity to attribute and articulate their greater value and to perform countless feats that prove and demonstrate, at least to themselves, that greater intrinsic value. When animals gain the capacity to argue the opposite, and do so on human terms, then we may have to rethink it all. But it doesn't look like happening.
Let me rephrase the question, do human have intrinsic value greater than that of other life forms?
Originally posted by FMFIf you had to choose between saving your trusty dogs life and say the life of Adolf Hitler. Which would you save and why?
Humans have the capacity to attribute and articulate their greater value and to perform countless feats that prove and demonstrate, at least to themselves, that greater intrinsic value. When animals gain the capacity to argue the opposite, and do so on human terms, then we may have to rethink it all. But it doesn't look like happening.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkPerhaps you could describe how this scenario you mention could possibly happen in a way that is worthy of a serious debate about the everyday lives of billions of people rather than a silly gimmick that sells the discourse short.
If you had to choose between saving your trusty dogs life and say the life of Adolf Hitler. Which would you save and why?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkHumans have de facto greater value because they have the capacity to attach and express such value to themselves and also demonstrate it. This is a philosophical debate in the human realm. There is no philosophical debate - or competition - with the animal kingdom about how humans perceive themselves.
Let me rephrase the question, do human have intrinsic value greater than that of other life forms?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkAn intrinsic value is one that is a property of the object itself.
Let me rephrase the question, do human have intrinsic value greater than that of other life forms?
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThings can have an intrinsic value to us, without them having an intrinsic value in the abstract.
If humans are the ones determining which creatures have greater "intrinsic" value, it isn't very intrinsic, now is it?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkIf you hold the view that life was created by an everlasting being, does this life have any value?
If you hold the view that life evolved from a chemical soup, does life have any value? Is it sacred?