What’s the Worth of Human Life?
The worth of one human life appears to lie between 2 and 2 billion €, more or less. It all depends on whose life, and I don’t get that. I’m not following.
I hear it depends on where human worth is measured. That is revolting.
Human life is human life.
One may still call some kinds of ‘human being’ less of a life ― for instance, an anencephalic (born brainless) child who is bound to die without experiencing any human feelings or insights. I understand this is debatable, at least.
But human life in full capacity, just being contingent on the money such or so a person can spend?
The real worth of human life doesn’t depend on that at all.
Unborn human life
Without going into the issue of abortion, one can still compare the aborted life and the miserable adult’s life ending on the other side of the world and the money spectrum. If the former is worthy of much deontological conundrum, then what about millions of the latter?
There is a massive incongruence at play. Pro-life movements should make a corresponding choice in this. There is much human life to be saved at relatively little expense. The question is not about one life or the other. There is no balance ― only incongruence.
So, please, tell me.
Is ‘the other side’ too far away?
Dying from poverty isn’t necessarily a far away issue, geographically or visually. Just turn on that screen or google something if you’re at the blog-wiki.
Moreover, the other side of the material world isn’t far away. Look at it from 4 light hours distance. That is, go to Neptune and look at our little globe if you can even see it with your telescope. Does one side appear far away from the other?
It’s about empathy.
Empathy doesn’t save lives except by being turned into positive action. By itself, it’s just something that comes easier with a perception of nearness than of distance.
This shows that empathy isn’t rational, nor irrational, but a-rational. Valuing rationality, empathy by itself is not enough for making important decisions. Note how AURELIS is about rationality and depth. In the worthiness of human life, we can see an example of its importance.
Empathy is very much OK in the combination. Rationality without it is also to be avoided. For instance, it could look at a million human lives as merely a statistic.
Rationality can make empathy more empathic.
And vice versa. This is the only way to properly value human life, even while it immediately shows the horrible situation of the present world in several ways. At least, we can then much better go forward toward making it a better world, a more humane and Compassionate one.
It’s the responsibility of those who can take responsibility, not of all others, but each individually.
Related Posts
Only Compassion Works
What works and towards what? This simple dual question has far-reaching consequences. [see: “If it works, then it’s OKAY?”] To me, this question is always important. “It works” is not enough as a statement about anything. Compared to placebo A placebo (defined as deceitful) will never do in any straightforward way since the ‘towards what’ Read the full article…
Whispering ― Language of Compassion
Whispering looks simple, almost effortless, yet it touches the deepest layers of connection. True whispering is never just a trick of technique but a language of Compassion, subtle and powerful, fragile and transformative. This blog explores that language — its promise and its complexity. From breaking to befriending For centuries, horses were trained by breaking Read the full article…
Compassionate Goal of Coaching
This goes further than usual. Compassion takes into account the total person and leads to Inner Strength. More than symptomatic This means that people need some proper insight early on. To some, this may be a hurdle even to consider it as a worthy goal. The West, at least, has become a symptomatic society. For Read the full article…