So, what I don't follow is why value isn't biological? To me, it seems that value, as it exists, is just a way to summarize the relationship between an object and one's biology/psychology.
As I was trying to say in the other thread, this is a real thing. My body craves food. My body needs food to live. I want to live. So we total those things up, and I assign value to the food. The value represents a the summary of tangible things to me at this moment. If I want to die, my valuing food may dip significantly. If I were dead, I wouldn't value food at all.
So what confuses me about your post, is where does value stop being just the representation of our biological/psychological relationships to things. And more importantly, when does it exist outside of the very narrow scope?
You talk of true value, but true value is not a descriptor that makes sense to me, as it doesn't represent any relationship. Or maybe it does, in that value doesn't exist without a relationship, therefore we have no true value?
I know you want to say "God values us, and he's all powerful, so that means his value is objective." But that's wandered into the magical unknowable alternate reality. Again, I suspect you use religious texts to 'know' the 'unknowable', but that seems more like optimism than knowledge as from my perspective, I don't see a need to believe anything has true value.
You covered a lot of stuff in the OP, with a lot of fuzziness. I'd be interested if you can hone in on this more specific part.
As I was trying to say in the other thread, this is a real thing. My body craves food. My body needs food to live. I want to live. So we total those things up, and I assign value to the food. The value represents a the summary of tangible things to me at this moment. If I want to die, my valuing food may dip significantly. If I were dead, I wouldn't value food at all.
So what confuses me about your post, is where does value stop being just the representation of our biological/psychological relationships to things. And more importantly, when does it exist outside of the very narrow scope?
You talk of true value, but true value is not a descriptor that makes sense to me, as it doesn't represent any relationship. Or maybe it does, in that value doesn't exist without a relationship, therefore we have no true value?
I know you want to say "God values us, and he's all powerful, so that means his value is objective." But that's wandered into the magical unknowable alternate reality. Again, I suspect you use religious texts to 'know' the 'unknowable', but that seems more like optimism than knowledge as from my perspective, I don't see a need to believe anything has true value.
You covered a lot of stuff in the OP, with a lot of fuzziness. I'd be interested if you can hone in on this more specific part.
