What is it that makes human life inherently valuable and worthy of protection?

[AFerri48]

Clearly we all recognize (or I should hope at least) that all human lives are worthy of protection under our laws. It’s why we are so against the concept of abortion. It’s not okay to just go around killing people. We recognize this, but how do you articulate the reason for why this is?

If I had to argue, I’d say that the main reason is due to our brain capacity and what human beings are capable of doing, which separates us all from animals. Without the right to life and the understanding that we can’t just attack and kill each other, we’d be savages.

Clearly, I can’t articulate it that well, but I feel this is along the correct lines.

 

[Blessedwithfive]

I’m pretty sure it’s because we have a soul. Animals do not. We were made in the image of God, animals, not so much…

 

[1Lord1Faith]

Clearly we all recognize (or I should hope at least) that all human lives are worthy of protection under our laws. It’s why we are so against the concept of abortion. It’s not okay to just go around killing people. We recognize this, **but how do you articulate the reason for why this is? **

If I had to argue, I’d say that the main reason is due to our brain capacity and what human beings are capable of doing, which separates us all from animals. Without the right to life and the understanding that we can’t just attack and kill each other, we’d be savages.

Clearly, I can’t articulate it that well, but I feel this is along the correct lines.

The golden rule.

Relatively speaking, in the last 100 years or so, we humans have diminished our own suffering to the point that we no longer value human life. I mean access to food, healthcare, education, entertainment, etc…has diminished our suffering to the point that we don’t see how precious life is.

 

[GEddie]

Simple. Without life, there **are **no other values: if human life is not worth protecting nothing is.

It is only because we are alive that we value, indeed **need, **nature. Once the last human being dies, no-one would mourn Earth falling into the sun, because there’d be nobody conscious enough to mourn it.

And we are incredibly and unpredictably vulnerable; human beings have fallen out of aircraft and lived, but have also slipped on wet flooring and died. Because we are so vulnerable, we require protection.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Usige]

An atheist will disagree, but human life is precious because we (and only we) are made in the image and likeness of God. It goes way beyond our capabilities that differ from animals. Even a child born with sever brain damage that is not capable of higher brain functions is precious. Human life should never be reduced to a value of a person’s capacity.

 

[BornInMarch]

Clearly we all recognize (or I should hope at least) that all human lives are worthy of protection under our laws. It’s why we are so against the concept of abortion. It’s not okay to just go around killing people. We recognize this, but how do you articulate the reason for why this is?

If I had to argue, I’d say that the main reason is due to our brain capacity and what human beings are capable of doing, which separates us all from animals. Without the right to life and the understanding that we can’t just attack and kill each other, we’d be savages.

Clearly, I can’t articulate it that well, but I feel this is along the correct lines.

Human life is valuable because of Empathy. When you are shown a video of a human being harmed or otherwise being in pain, your brain instinctively runs a simulation of how this would feel if it happened to you. This isn’t taught; the younger someone is when shown this the stronger the instinct is. You can repress the voice telling you that it’s wrong to stab that person, but it’s still there and you were still born with it.

Humans listen to it because doing so creates a world that is best for everyone, and not doing so creates a world that is worse for everyone.

And to be clear, Objective Morality isn’t just a religious thing. Many atheists also believe in Objective Morality; Secular Humanism is one example of a group that believes human rights are objective and inherent, without believing they were created by a God.

 

[mdgspencer]

God makes it so.

 

[ArielRussu]

The golden rule.

Relatively speaking, in the last 100 years or so, we humans have diminished our own suffering to the point that we no longer value human life. I mean access to food, healthcare, education, entertainment, etc…has diminished our suffering to the point that we don’t see how precious life is.

Exactly how does suffering make human life precious?

The suffering I’ve had in life and witnessed has certainly NOT influenced my view and make me view human life as precious. I view human life as precious because it’s common sense. Mother Theresa sought out suffering (left convent to live on streets of Calcutta) as a way to understand and appreciate the struggles of others, so she was better able to help people (ex. Homeless, outcasted, etc…).

I doubt watching others suffer or her own suffering played a role in her viewing each life as precious. For, she saw human life as precious because she saw Jesus in everyone. She sought to see people as God did. There suffering didn’t play a role, it was the fact each person is made in the likeness and image of God that did.

Anyway, in general, unless you are trying to find a way to help others, to seek out suffering for yourself or others just because is absolutely foolish. Fix and end the pain if there is some way too, don’t prolong the problem to “humble” yourselves. To search out suffering without the intent to understand and help others shows, in my opinion, a lack of sanity. Especially when done to bring suffering upon others just for your own personal benefit.

 

[OneSheep]

Human life is valuable because of Empathy. When you are shown a video of a human being harmed or otherwise being in pain, your brain instinctively runs a simulation of how this would feel if it happened to you. This isn’t taught; the younger someone is when shown this the stronger the instinct is. You can repress the voice telling you that it’s wrong to stab that person, but it’s still there and you were still born with it.

Humans listen to it because doing so creates a world that is best for everyone, and not doing so creates a world that is worse for everyone.

And to be clear, Objective Morality isn’t just a religious thing. Many atheists also believe in Objective Morality; Secular Humanism is one example of a group that believes human rights are objective and inherent, without believing they were created by a God.

Hi BiM,

I like your answer, but I’m not sure that that the younger the person is, the stronger the response. Empathy surely develops with experience. However, there is an inner layer, a neuronal response ('mirror neurons") which provide a response without actual empathy. Empathy has more to do with an understanding of the needs of the other, not a simple mirroring of emotion.

To me, we have no reason to downplay the subjective, when the subjective is such an integral part of our nature. We see, we love. We understand, we love more. Value is (also) a subjective experience that we all share given the levels of our awareness. It is true that resentment and desire can occasionally blind us to value, but these are not permanent conditions.

 

[IWantGod]

Clearly we all recognize (or I should hope at least) that all human lives are worthy of protection under our laws. It’s why we are so against the concept of abortion. It’s not okay to just go around killing people. We recognize this, but how do you articulate the reason for why this is?

If I had to argue, I’d say that the main reason is due to our brain capacity and what human beings are capable of doing, which separates us all from animals. Without the right to life and the understanding that we can’t just attack and kill each other, we’d be savages.

Clearly, I can’t articulate it that well, but I feel this is along the correct lines.

We have a personal soul created by God.

If that is not true then any value we place upon ourselves and others is delusional.

 

[davidv]

Clearly we all recognize (or I should hope at least) that all human lives are worthy of protection under our laws. It’s why we are so against the concept of abortion. It’s not okay to just go around killing people. We recognize this, but how do you articulate the reason for why this is?

If I had to argue, I’d say that the main reason is due to our brain capacity and what human beings are capable of doing, which separates us all from animals. Without the right to life and the understanding that we can’t just attack and kill each other, we’d be savages.

Clearly, I can’t articulate it that well, but I feel this is along the correct lines.

The Catechism answers the question quite well:

357 Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. And he is called by grace to a covenant with his Creator, to offer him a response of faith and love that no other creature can give in his stead.

This means that our value is not based on any physical capacities or capabilities.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I think arguments on the matter are dependent on someone holding some of the same values. If you are talking to someone that doesn’t share those values there may not be arguments to convince them.

 

[IWantGod]

I think arguments on the matter are dependent on someone holding some of the same values. If you are talking to someone that doesn’t share those values there may not be arguments to convince them.

I think the question is ontological. If there is no God then human life has no true value. It is merely fantasy and biological compulsion that motivates our activity. It has no meaning.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I think the question is ontological. If there is no God then human life has no true value…

What would be the necessary view of God (giving that different people may believe different things about God) and the values that the person would need to already have to agree with the ontological argument that you have in mind?

 

[fisherman_carl]

Re: What is it that makes human life inherently valuable and worthy of protection? .

Love.

Love others as you love yourself. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Don’t do unto others what you would not have them do unto you. If you care for yourself, if you think yourself as needing protection, then you should extend at least the same for others of your own kind. Without this we could not have a civilized society.

 

[Wesrock]

Unlike any other material life we’re aware of, we are the only ones in possession of reason and intellect. Our selves persist even after death by nature.

But even disregarding such things, we must look towards the natural ends of our species, our raisons d’etre. This includes the valuing of the lives of all humans. It’s, in a way, one of the ends for which we were made, and therefore, to be “good” humans, it’s what we do. It helps us to better instantiate the human essence in our own being, it a more fullness of being in ourselves, which is good, rather than creating a deprivation in what we should be.

 

[IWantGod]

What would be the necessary view of God (giving that different people may believe different things about God) and the values that the person would need to already have to agree with the ontological argument that you have in mind?

Its besides the point. If there is no objective universal standard of moral truth, then the values we hold are just genetic biological compulsions in relation to our environment.

The idea that we “should” value life is a fantasy that some of us are compelled to indulge in.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Its besides the point.

I dont think it is. Per the O.P.

We recognize this, but how do you articulate the reason for why this is?

I had hoped my question might draw out a more detailed explanation on this. It seems it didn’t. But okay.

 

[TheCuriousCat]

Its besides the point. If there is no objective universal standard of moral truth, then the values we hold are just genetic biological compulsions in relation to our environment.

The idea that we “should” value life is a fantasy that some of us are compelled to indulge in.

Your concept of fantasy is the polar opposite of mine.

The only being that I can be 100% exists, in at least some form, is me. I am undoubtedly, not exactly as I perceive myself, but that I exist is impossible for me to deny without falling into a logical inconsistency.

If I value something, then it is valuable to the one and only being that I can know for 100% certainty exists.Therefor you are by definition at least as valuable as I find you valuable. You might be more valuable, but you are at the very least that valuable. You might be a figment of my imagination, but to the degree that I value my concept of you, you have at least that much value. I don’t even need to entertain the idea that other people are real to come to the conclusion that people have at least some value. If I do accept that other people are real, then I have to conclude that other people have value to each other beyond the value I assign them.

If a god existed, the value that god places on anything is by definition subjective unless somehow its value is the aggregate value placed by all the beings capable of assigning value. The idea that the value I assign to things, the only value that I am 100% certain exists, is a fantasy is clearly absurd.

 

[IWantGod]

Your concept of fantasy is the polar opposite of mine.

The only being that I can be 100% exists, in at least some form, is me. I am undoubtedly, not exactly as I perceive myself, but that I exist is impossible for me to deny without falling into a logical inconsistency.

If I value something, then it is valuable to the one and only being that I can know for 100% certainty exists.Therefor you are by definition at least as valuable as I find you valuable. You might be more valuable, but you are at the very least that valuable. You might be a figment of my imagination, but to the degree that I value my concept of you, you have at least that much value. I don’t even need to entertain the idea that other people are real to come to the conclusion that people have at least some value. If I do accept that other people are real, then I have to conclude that other people have value to each other beyond the value I assign them.

If a god existed, the value that god places on anything is by definition subjective unless somehow its value is the aggregate value placed by all the beings capable of assigning value. The idea that the value I assign to things, the only value that I am 100% certain exists, is a fantasy is clearly absurd.

You mean value as in “i* like cheese and pickle sandwiches*”. Yeah sure the sandwich is valued by someone, but it has no value in and of itself objectively.

Your idea of God is different to mine, but the point is if there is no objective universal standard of moral truth then your life has no value regardless of whether or not you give me pleasure.