The AskPhilosophers logo.

Value

Do people have intrinsic value? For several years now I've worked with people with disabilities of all sorts and degrees of severity. It has made me question a lot of things and think about why people matter. There are so many external elements, positive and negative, of these peoples lives I've given consideration: the things that impact our community and others in it but is there something else underneath all these things that gives value to people? I believe they do although I cannot express why. Just by asking these questions I feel uneasy like I'm being disrespectful by discussing peoples existence like a math equation. So my question regards that weightiness I experience and where it comes from. (Could you recommend further reading?)
Accepted:
June 26, 2014

Comments

Stephen Maitzen
June 26, 2014 (changed June 26, 2014) Permalink

Where the weightiness you experience comes from is a psychological, psychobiological, or anthropological question and therefore not a question that philosophers, as such, are competent to answer. Having said that, I'll speculate anyway! It wouldn't surprise me to learn that natural selection has favored a tendency in human beings to treat all, and only, human beings as belonging to a morally special category. But, of course, a tendency favored by natural selection might nevertheless be hard to defend with argument.

About the weightiness itself: Speaking as a philosopher, I'd urge us to distinguish between persons (i.e., people) and human beings. I regard person as a psychological category: members of the category possess distinctive (if broadly and vaguely defined) psychological traits and dispositions, such self-consciousness and rationality. I think those traits and dispositions make any person morally significant in a way in which any non-person isn't (even a non-person that's morally significant to some degree). I don't think this distinction gives persons the right to treat non-persons any which way they like -- I don't have the right to torture a cat just for fun even if I'm a person and the cat isn't -- but the distinction does carry some moral weight. By contrast, human being is a biological category -- a species -- and I can't see how species membership, all by itself, carries any moral weight. So I think it's possible to hold that people (i.e., persons) as such matter but that human beings as such don't. A member of our species might fail to be a person and therefore lack the moral significance that comes with personhood; a member of some non-human species might be a person and therefore have the moral significance that persons have.

For further reading, you might start with this SEP entry.

  • Log in to post comments
Source URL: https://askphilosophers.org/question/5602
© 2005-2025 AskPhilosophers.org