monetary value of human life? (1 Viewer)

[hiphophorray123]

Kip Viscusi, through his study, averaged statistics and came up with a monetary value which he believes is the accepted monetary value of human life, what we are willing to pay in exchange for a human life....this amount was %US 6.1 Million....it has come to be regarded as the statistical value of human life.

do you agree that there is an actual monetary value on human life?

 

[Jaydels]

No

If someone close to me died, I couldn't find $6.1 million and go buy another one. Human life can't be given a value imo

 

[transcendent]

Then there are some people who you think aren't worth 5 cents. Balances out really.

 

[Jaydels]

Not really. Even if I thought someone was only worth 5 cents, someone else would think they were worth millions. We're all loved by somebody.

 

[transcendent]

how... revolting. you're so optimistic. i wish i was that optimistic

 

[Jaydels]

how is that revolting?

 

[Jaydels]

But it's true

 

[katie_tully]

But it's true

true? prove it.

 

[Jaydels]

It's my theory. Therefore it's true until someone proves it wrong.

 

[katie_tully]

It's my theory. Therefore it's true until someone proves it wrong.

what in the hell.

"it's a theory therefore it's true until someone proves it wrong"? theories dont work that way, dear.

 

[Abbeygale]

It's my theory. Therefore it's true until someone proves it wrong.

Jaydels, meet the burden of proof- http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html

In case that is too difficult for you to understand, the burden of proof is generally put on the person who makes the assertion, ie you.
Until your theory is proved true, or any evidence at all is put forward by you, it isn't 'true'. Until you make some attempt to do so, I'm gonna vote for 'cliche wannabe-sentimental bullshit' also.

 

[Jaydels]

So what... I can't prove it

It's pathetic that I can't make a statement without being required to prove it.

Call it "cliche wannabe sentimental bullshit", I couldn't give a shit, that's your opinion, but aren't I entitled to mine?

 

[katie_tully]

So what... I can't prove it

It's pathetic that I can't make a statement without being required to prove it.

Call it "cliche wannabe sentimental bullshit", I couldn't give a shit, that's your opinion, but aren't I entitled to mine?

Oh. My. God.

"It's pathetic that I can't make a statement without being required to prove it."

Isn't that the whole idea of making a statement? You make it, so long as you can substantiate it? If we all went around saying things we didn't have to back up, the world would be further backwards than it already is.

stop stealing lines of shitty forward emails.

 

[Jaydels]

stating something doesn't doesn't make it a fact

 

[katie_tully]

stating something doesn't doesn't make it a fact

Which then leads me to question why you said -

It's my theory. Therefore it's true until someone proves it wrong.

 

[Jaydels]

omg. This is rediculous. Obviously if its my theory not everyone will agree with it. I can accept that

 

[katie_tully]

Back on topic -

This is a hard question. What do you do when your kid is held for ransom for a certain amount of money? I guess in that instance, you're willing to place a monetry value on somebodys head, because you're willing to pay the money for the person. Meanwhile, if you're the kidnapper, you're putting a price on somebodys head for your own gain.

I couldn't put a value on the head of anybody important in my life - in a sense that, I couldn't sell them to the highest bidder.

Oh...except my brother.

 

[Jago]

hahaha calm down girls. That's right, I'm looking at you.

do you agree that there is an actual monetary value on human life?

I'd kill someone for less.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

If you agree with Kant, then you can't use a human as a means (a human is an end in itself), and is incapable of monetary value. I agree, and certainly any attempt to put such a value on human life has implications of commodification.

What practical purpose does it achieve anyway?

 

[neo o]

If you agree with Kant, then you can't use a human as a means (a human is an end in itself), and is incapable of monetary value. I agree, and certainly any attempt to put such a value on human life has implications of commodification.

What practical purpose does it achieve anyway?

Insurance perhaps?

Though, it's probably better to apply a subjective standard. Assuming that human life has a value, different people will have a different value. We aren't communists.