Human Value Nonexistent?

[Mystic]

Wrong. That is not a valid reason to value anything.

I seem to agree with you, but it seems such is that state of humanity.

Believing in objective value is not a reason to value anything. Yet it's our most foundational belief that drives us to value things.

Wrong - since it proceeds from an incorrect premise.

Explain to me, how anyone would have subjective value to anything, without believing it's of value in reality?

At most, you value yourself, and do things for yourself. Evolution wise, it's a passionate instinct. It doesn't need justification, it's just what it is. It's make us flourish, we like, we enjoy, it works.

Yes, you can, if you can show why it should be.
[

Or if I believe in a lie of why it should be

We are all seeking purpose. It's the human experience.

Value of yourself is foundational survival instinct. A cow values itself and doesn't want to die. We don't care about it's own value of itself, we kill it and eat it.

Humans sense of value is probably the highest sense of value on earth. But is any of it justified rationally?

And the sense of value seems chaotic worldly wise, but in the tribe/nation/culture, it seems stable, by simply praise value consensus.

Have enough people praise a thing excessively, and it becomes more valuable in our perception.

[pocaracas]

I think 16 pages of the same thing is enough, don't you?

[IATIA]

Humans sense of value is probably the highest sense of value on earth.

Sorry, subjective statement. Is that what the whales think?

[Mystic]

You don't think the action actually happened? That action is the actual basis of praise.

The action happened, whether it's praiseworthy or not, is not proven. Is it the basis? I thought you said it's conceptual. I thought you said because we have a concept of praise, therefore, things are praiseworthy.

But if we prove it, the question of belief is irrelevant.

Evolution wise, when did the belief in praise, become rationally justified? And how?

Not to those who understand its roots.

And not to those who believe in myths.

That is where you are wrong. There would be no point in giving it worth if it already has worth.

This doesn't seem ring to me. The opposite seems true. The only point of giving it worth, is if it has worth.

The basis of that worth we give it is not some imagined preexisting worth, but the nature and the purpose of the object itself.

So what is the nature and purpose of a human being? You have the answer?

Religions have an answer. We all seek certainty. But at the same time, want certainty to confirm some foundational praise of our nature.

[Darkstar]

Humans sense of value is probably the highest sense of value on earth.

Sorry, subjective statement. Is that what the whales think?

Do whales think?

[Mystic]

Humans sense of value is probably the highest sense of value on earth.

Sorry, subjective statement. Is that what the whales think?

Well I don't know, I'm simpling guess with language, we felt the need to praise one another. Those who were praised more did better. Those who felt higher value in condemnation and praise of society did better.

The sense of value grew and grew.

[The Grand Nudger]

I know that. We can make value judgements, and they are valuable to us. But is value a delusional concept created by passionate instinct? How do you show it's not.

You tell me. I value hammers because they expertly handle a specific problem. The more adequate any given design of hammer is in performing this task the more value it has to me. How much delusion, passion, or instinct do you think is involved in such an appraisal of value?

[genkaus]

I seem to agree with you, but it seems such is that state of humanity.

Believing in objective value is not a reason to value anything. Yet it's our most foundational belief that drives us to value things.

And what belief you are talking about here?

Explain to me, how anyone would have subjective value to anything, without believing it's of value in reality?

By believing in its purpose in reality.

At most, you value yourself, and do things for yourself. Evolution wise, it's a passionate instinct. It doesn't need justification, it's just what it is. It's make us flourish, we like, we enjoy, it works.

That is the justification that you say is not needed.

Or if I believe in a lie of why it should be

Then that is not a justification.

We are all seeking purpose. It's the human experience.

Value of yourself is foundational survival instinct. A cow values itself and doesn't want to die. We don't care about it's own value of itself, we kill it and eat it.

Humans sense of value is probably the highest sense of value on earth. But is any of it justified rationally?

And the sense of value seems chaotic worldly wise, but in the tribe/nation/culture, it seems stable, by simply praise value consensus.

Have enough people praise a thing excessively, and it becomes more valuable in our perception.

The moment you declare it as a foundational instinct, you cut off any possibility of rational justification. Thus, for you atleast, valuing yourself is an irrational, unjustified instinct. If you actually let go of that premise, you may find an actual justification.

---

The action happened, whether it's praiseworthy or not, is not proven.
Is it the basis?

Yes. The action itself is the basis of whether its praiseworthy or not.

I thought you said it's conceptual. I thought you said because we have a concept of praise, therefore, things are praiseworthy.

Then you misunderstood. I said that because we have a concept of praise, things may be praiseworthy. Whether they are or not depends on the things themselves.

Evolution wise, when did the belief in praise, become rationally justified? And how?

"Evolution wise". What does that have to do with rational justification?

And not to those who believe in myths.

But their answer is a delusion.

This doesn't seem ring to me. The opposite seems true. The only point of giving it worth, is if it has worth.

You don't give someone money if he already has money. You don't feed someone who isn't hungry. The same way you don't give it worth if it already has worth. How do you not understand this simple concept?

So what is the nature and purpose of a human being? You have the answer?

For myself - yes. Not for you.

Religions have an answer.

But no valid justification for those answers.

We all seek certainty. But at the same time, want certainty to confirm some foundational praise of our nature.

Don't generalize your own delusions about humanity on the rest of us.

[Mystic]

You tell me. I value hammers because they expertly handle a specific problem. The more adequate any given design of hammer is in performing this task the more value it has to me. How much delusion, passion, or instinct do you think is involved in such an appraisal of value?

You are right. I'm talking more about praise as in moral praise, worth, that type of thing.

Well I'm not saying all of it's "pure instinct". It has structure, but it's driven by instinct. So subjective value has some structure. If it didn't have any structure, we wouldn't function.

I like lasagna more then chicken, therefore I value lasagna more then chicken. Yes I like lasagna more. It makes me happier when I eat lasagna. Therefore it's more valuable to me. This subjective. But a lot of this chaotic. For example, when I was a kid, I read garfield books. Garfield liked lasagna a lot. Then I had a passion for it. This passion remains. It's passion.

In the case of myths, they are not without structure either. They are as valuable as they work for a human and provide structure to society. They mean something to that human. But it's driven by passion at it's basis.

---

Genkaus, I think we are going in circles. YEs but no, yes but no, type thing.

---

I want to say Genkaus, I do appreciate you trying to guide me through. But perhaps sometimes there is a dead lock on what people take as obvious.

I can't seem to grasp the idea because we have a concept of praise, we therefore have a concept of objective praise. You would think if we have this objectivity, we would all have agreed by now. Further question is evolution wise, did the perception of "pride" grow as primates to human evolved...But when did primate to humans ever rely on objective analytical reasoning to act morally? If it was all subjective then, and everyone was relying on subjective and united as we evolved, when did it become objective?

If we always misguided in our morals, and never justified (we didn't have books to write way back when we were evolving) it, how did objectivity judgment ever take roots in a human?

[Mystic]

Some thoughts about how possibly how deluded we become of praise. My experience with world of warcraft. I was a Shaman. They were way over-powered at one point. I use to kill three warriors at the same time. It felt good. I praised myself doing so. But any person that was competent would do the same with a Shaman.

I play volley ball. I react and act on instinct. I do a good play, and I am praised for it in perception of myself.

As a kid, I got into a fight because someone insulted me, after I missed on a free-throw.

I was super good at soccer. The kids in school admired and praised me for it. And is even possible to rationalize the very basis of praise?

What is the basis to any of this praise? What of it was rationally thought out and justified?

If primate to humans evolving praised what they praised and evolution favored those who were praised more, as naturally they would get children, what of it is objective.

It's all praise that simply works. We praise, but is it praiseworthy simply because we praise it? And would we praise it, if we didn't believe it's praiseworthy? Paradoxical.