babble: This story came out about a month ago-calls into question human worth

FAQ | Forum Home

»	babble » right brain babble » humanities & science » This story came out about a month ago-calls into question human worth

Email this thread to someone!

Author

Topic: This story came out about a month ago-calls into question human worth

charlieM
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6514

posted 06 June 2006 01:04 PM

CBC did the same story on Bird Flu vaccination priority

When I was younger, about 14 or so, I was constantly pondering anything ponderable and not surprisingly coming up with my own "theories" as I liked to call them. lol One of those theories was that there is a human worth and the elderly and very young were infact worth less than people 20 and up (for reasons explained in the article). Now of course I wouldn't have mentioned this to anyone because it is just one of those thing you don't want to touch with a twenty-foot pole.
So, after reading the story, maybe doing a bit of research on what an ethicist is, one can imagine the issue is not the bird flu, but acceptance of ideas. Now, I am 95% sure if I came to this site and posted my opinion on "human worth", people would be appauled as if I were preaching neo-nazi ideologies (you CAN disagree with that, but I think you'd be lieing to yourself more than anyone else).
Is the issue public acceptence of scientific principles (the public being you, the rabble users)? or the fear of apply utilitarian ideologies to human values?
I guess that at certain times ulitilitarian methods might have to be applied, take for example 'putting people in underground caves to save the human species' in the movie Impact.

From: hamilton | Registered: Jul 2004 | IP: Logged

500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684

posted 06 June 2006 01:48 PM

I think the inevitable problem is that even if you assume that there is some abstract measure of an individual's value; and that different individuals measure up differently; there is then the issue that whatever measurement would be developed would be inherently biased to favour the group of which the developers belong, as well as likely be wrong in general as some things are just difficult to measure. Also, there is the issue that such a measurement may be applied when not necessary.

Our currencies are arbitrarily measured all the time; financial, social and sexual being the most important ones. People might not take too kindly to a new measurement system in which they have even less control of their personal score.

From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006 | IP: Logged

N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 06 June 2006 01:54 PM

Google "inherent worth and dignity of every person". You will discover that, for example, the philosophical premises of the Unitarians can be summarized by such a phrase. Nor are such values limited to them.

From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003 | IP: Logged

charlieM
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6514

posted 06 June 2006 02:10 PM

The cbc article made more sense of what I'm talking about. They explained in some detail of how people around the age of 20 have more invested in them and can accomplish more than the elderly and very young. That is basically what I based my original idea on. So, what it does is through out the idea of intrinsic value.
you have to throw out all values, morals, and ethics to understand that a 80 year old person does not contribute to society like a 20 year old does.

From: hamilton | Registered: Jul 2004 | IP: Logged

nuclearfreezone
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9059

posted 06 June 2006 05:07 PM

And this has been reflected in our ever-worsening social policies over the past 20-25 years.

From: B.C. | Registered: Apr 2005 | IP: Logged

charlieM
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6514

posted 06 June 2006 06:52 PM

quote:
Originally posted by nuclearfreezone:
And this has been reflected in our ever-worsening social policies over the past 20-25 years.

Has the govenment started to neglect seniors, or has the baby boom just become a senior cohort to quickly for the gov't to adapt?
I know my grandparents are doing better than I am, and they don't even work.

From: hamilton | Registered: Jul 2004 | IP: Logged

charlieM
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6514

posted 09 June 2006 12:21 PM

lol, i guess i was right about this being the type of subject no oen wants to touch with a 20 foot pole.

From: hamilton | Registered: Jul 2004 | IP: Logged

Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 09 June 2006 04:17 PM

What *Is* your point? That Certain people like thevery old and very young are 'worth less' and therefore, what..expendable by any rational analysis?? I hope not. We preserve our elderly not because theyre still productive or useful but because theyre Our parents. They took care of Us when We were helpless and oneday We'll be old too. We preserve and protect our young because most societies aren't suicidal or sociopathic or incapable of seeing 'worth' in other things beyond subject 'utilitarian' standards of production or self defence or whatever. Utilitarian only concepts just beg the big question anyhow, why such a value on 'production' if we don't value life Itself in the first place? If you just want to assert than some are 'objectively' worth more than others in General, then I'll just have to ask what the 'worth' of someone is who sees no worth in others. Their worth to Others that is, since everyone seems to understand their Own, even psychos. If you have some real Point here do let us know.

From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004 | IP: Logged

nuclearfreezone
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9059

posted 09 June 2006 05:32 PM

In my experience, society today measures a person's worth in terms of net worth, i.e., dollars and cents. The more you have in your account and the more you can contribute financially to society, through your work, the more you are worth. This leaves out the old, the young, the ill, or anyone else who is weak or perceived to be weak.

No money=no power. We live in a greedy world. If you don't have money you are marginalized and then spit upon. I know from experience.

From: B.C. | Registered: Apr 2005 | IP: Logged

nuclearfreezone
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9059

posted 09 June 2006 05:41 PM

"We preserve our elderly not because theyre still productive or useful but because theyre Our parents. They took care of Us when We were helpless and oneday We'll be old too. We preserve and protect our young because most societies aren't suicidal or sociopathic or incapable of seeing 'worth' in other things beyond subject 'utilitarian' standards of production or self defence or whatever."

Erik, this is the way it should be but it's not. I pulled my mom out of a nursing home because of bruises and other issues of abuse and neglect. You wouldn't believe how many people told me I was crazy, even my own family, and refused to help me or her. I looked after her for 3 1/2 years and when some new issue came up and some new device or piece of equipment was needed there was never any money availbale from anywhere -- not the govt., not the family, not anybody.

Society doesn't care about our kids. Note the low welfare rates that single moms and their kids are supposed to "live" on. We just got slammed by the UN for clawing back the CTB from welfare rates.

No, Erik, if you're poor, ill, old, young, or in any way incapacitated mentally or physically you are totally disposable in our present society, yes, even here in Canada! Sad but true. I lived through it, I suffered the "slings and arrows" of unbelievable meanness as a single parent and then again as caregiver for my mom. Yes, we are disposable and nobody cares.

From: B.C. | Registered: Apr 2005 | IP: Logged

charlieM
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6514

posted 10 June 2006 12:49 PM

My point is when do we switch from being humanitarians to utilitarians. When vaccination times comes...maybe... But, imagine if we applied such principles to our legal system. You would have to think of our legal system not as it is, was, or is becoming, but just as a legal system. If someone pulls the plug on someone with a day left live, should 80 years be taken away from that person?
Personally, I think our legal system is ridiculous to begin with, but I have no answers. Perhaps adapting tradtional ways (almost lost) of the aboriginal peoples of canada?

From: hamilton | Registered: Jul 2004 | IP: Logged

Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 10 June 2006 06:18 PM

quote:
University of Vermont ethicist Alan Wertheimer, professor emeritus of political science and current visiting scholar at the National Institutes of Health, along with NIH's Bioethics Chief Ezekiel Emanuel, recommend placing healthy people from early adolescence to middle age toward the front of the line for vaccination.

Anyone wanna bet against my gut feeling that messers Wertheimer and Emanuel are healthy middle aged guys?

It's all way off, anyway. It's rather self evident to me that top priority should go to 47 year olds with a reverence for pamphleteers from the American Revolution.

From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001 | IP: Logged

morningstar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12378

posted 10 June 2006 06:51 PM

as far as younger people being put in the position of being forced to make decisions about older people-if older people were making more ethical decisions themselves our kids and grand kids would't be put in these untenable positions.
i can't imagine why any thinking person over 50 whose kids are grown wouldn't be determined that children and young people be given priority for vaccines, etc.
as far as being aged and clinging to life long after independence and mobility are gone- seems selfish and downright unsavoury for everyone.
perhaps because most people have not experienced old fashioned family farming and aren't as comfortable with death as a natural and often desireable outcome for all creatures[yes this means us] they try to avoid it at all cost at great emotional and financial expense for society. i won't ever put my kids or my society through a long drawn out demise and i wish more oldies had the gumtion to commit to the same. why do those of us over 50 seem to feel that we can just keep on grabbing whatever we can get at any cost-we've grabbed and stolen too much already.
and for you younger people who are adults and just can't let your parents move on gracefully- you best grow up now.

From: stratford, on | Registered: Apr 2006 | IP: Logged

Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 10 June 2006 09:42 PM

I hear you NuclearFreezone, IMO it's the creeping affects of corporatism, more humane values are still there I think, but the Structure can no longer recognise any other Functional value except money or control. And those who 'manage' the structure naturally tend to view Everything that way after awhile. It's their job. My mother is now in a wheel chair because doctors couldn't be bothered to actually check out her supposed 'arthritis' directly, managed to get to her just before her spinal chord was completely severed but never recovered full use of her legs. If we had more change we could sue I guess, but what would be the point now anyhow? Shouldn't have happened in the first place, two tier medicine is already here. Meanwhile the BC NDp is still talking about its immanent 'threat' and the Liberals still talk about 'saving' it.

I don't know what CharlieM is getting at exactly, except to say that I've found these abstract issues can usually be decided fairly easily on a one to one basis, no big contradiction there.

[ 10 June 2006: Message edited by: EriKtheHalfaRed ]

From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004 | IP: Logged

charlieM
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6514

posted 10 June 2006 11:17 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:

Anyone wanna bet against my gut feeling that messers Wertheimer and Emanuel are healthy middle aged guys?
It's all way off, anyway. It's rather self evident to me that top priority should go to 47 year olds with a reverence for pamphleteers from the American Revolution.

They aren't at the top of the list, people around the age of 20 are (that was in the CBC article).

From: hamilton | Registered: Jul 2004 | IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time

Hop To: