Human Value Nonexistent?

[genkaus]

True enough. But there even being a such thing as praise is not proven.

Ofcourse it is. The same way it is proven that there is such a thing as measurement.

True enough. Now on proving there is such a basis. There is a such measurement to humanities actions and intentions.

Read what I wrote - there isn't such a basis - yet.

That is true. But there being an objective standard at all is not proven either.

Because there isn't - yet.

There being a possible basis to praise is not proven either.

Yes it is. And you agreed to it in this very post.

Do you think that the praise afforded to an action should depend on the action and not the one giving the praise?

Yes.

Then we both agree that there can be and should be an objective basis for praise.

That is not proven. Or if there such a thing as praiseworthy.

You just agreed to it.

I think you are not understanding my point. Evolution wise, we praise each other right. We developed a concept of praise, but it was never objective. Now you saying humanity is getting to an objective judgement, but somehow are minds have to be capable of objective judgement. They being capable of objective judgement is not proven but seems to be disproven by evolution (naturalistically wise).

Clealry you don't understand how evolution works. We don't praise each-other 'evolution wise'. And that we are capable/not capable of objective judgment is neither proven nor disproven by evolution alone.

What is proven is that 'evolution wise' we have the capacity to reason, i.e. to make judgments based on our perception of reality. We are also capable of not letting our emotions or instincts affect the judgment. So yes, we are capable of making objective judgments.

---

Science deals with evidence, not proof.

And, if you don't believe science or logic can evidentially justify values why are you expecting justification?

Because I can be wrong about my beliefs. I am hoping.

I think that some people are wiser than others but that is merely my opinion. If I assume I am right about that nevertheless I can make arguments following it. All I really mean by the fact that some people are wiser than others is my own interpretation of what it means for people to be "wise".

True, but then you believe it can have some reality and that it does, but not in exactly the way you perceive.

I'll explain: If objectivity refers to all objects in the universe and objects refer to things, then anything that is a thing - everything in other words - is an object. Therefore subjective things - subjectivity - must also be objects, so they must also be part of objectivity, so they must also be subjective. Therefore some things are entirely objective, while others are both objective and subjective.

On the other hand if we define subjectivity and objectivity as necessarily opposites, then anything that is subjective isn't an object, so it isn't a thing, so it doesn't exist.

Subjectivity is imaginary, imagination is the opposite of real, therefore it doesn't exist.

But then, in a different sense, subjectivity is imaginary, and imagination does exist in the sense that it is "there" we have an imagination.

I like that and have to think about it more.

To paraphrase Stephen Fry: If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people in the world?

Happiness is not necessarily bliss. Humanities belief in their value, even to a starving african child, gives them a sense of peace. It distresses them, but gives them a sense of peace.

We hope knowledge will make us better humans, but it may not, well not in the way we hoped for.
[/quote]