KnightWhoSaysNi

In a current debate with a theist, he challenged me to logically prove my contention of the humanist view that there is intrinsic value of human life.

To me, that just seems like an odd question and I'm not too sure about how to answer it. It just seems self-evident to me. I value my own life. Why not others? It's like asking me to logically prove that love exists.

Any thoughts?

madmax2976

Actually love is human emotion and thus more of an activity than a "thing" that exists.

As for intrinsic human value, I don't believe there is any such thing, so I can't help you defend such a point. Humans place a certain value on things depending on the circumstances.

Without human feelings in regards to themselves and other humans, I have no idea where "value" would come from, or what the value would be.

bd-from-kg

The reason the question seems odd is that it's meaningless. There's no such thing as "intrinsic value". For a thing to have value, it must have an (actual or potential) valuer. And if it does, its "value" is a relationship between it and the valuer (or as Alonzo Fyfe would insist), between it and the valuer's desires). It's not an intrinsic property of the thing itself.

To ask for proof that a thing has intrinsic value is like asking for proof that something is "intrinsically close" or "intrinsically west" without specifying what it's supposed to be close to or west of.

madmax2976

Oh, and you don't have to contend that there is "intrinsic value" to human life to argue for humanism.

If your theist friend contends there is intrinsic value to human life, ask him to define what he means by that, and then ask him to support his assertion. (Preferably with more than another mere assertion)

DRFseven

Well, there IS no intrinsic value in the thing (including the person) being valued. The relative value of anything is perceived by the individual doing the valuing. Any individual may be valueless to any other individual, while that same individual may have value to others. Some value everyone, while others value only some (or, rarely, none).

KnightWhoSaysNi

Thanks for the replies. I can see your points. I guess the theist might contend in response, "Aha!!! You can't prove humans are intrinsically valuable! If a nihilist said you weren't of value and thought you should be killed, then you have no foundation to object to him morally! Only God can give value to human life! Submit heathen!"

How might I'd reply to that?

DRFseven

Even if there WERE a god, why would the fact that it valued people cause people to have intrinsic value? The evaluator would still be doing the valuing. So what difference would a god make?

KnightWhoSaysNi

I guess the theist would reply that God is all knowing and omnibenevolent thus makes a higher standard for judgement or something.

But personally, my view is still that human beings do have instrinsic value. I can't seem to logically 'prove' this since it's a value judgement. It just makes more sense to me that if we all believed humans didn't have value, life would be brutal and short. It makes sense to me in a fuzzy way I can't articulate that having value for human life makes a more happier, just, society.

But I guess the theist would just respond, "ah, but that's just your opinion. A person in considerable power need not have value for human life and can still live a prosperous life."

Grrr... I guess I'm a little stumped.

Dr. Retard

My two cents:

Moral and meta-ethical debates and terminology are greatly confused, and whenever a theist claims to have the high ground, (s)he's bluffing.

I don't know what "intrinsic value" is supposed to be. I can tell you what it's not supposed to be. And, until we figure out what it's supposed to be, it's difficult to judge the various positions -- that intrinsic value is real, or fictional, or allowed or disallowed or mandated by theism or naturalism or whatever.

DRFseven

But just use common sense. For something to be of value, it must be valued, right? Assume you value your car; where is the process of valuing taking place? In YOU, not in your car. Someone else might see your car as valueless.

In contrast, let's say your car is a Honda. Where is the "Honda-ness" taking place? In the car. The "Honda-ness" is intrinsic to the car; no matter who beholds the car, it's always a Honda, whereas the value changes according to the evaluator.