From: Peter C. McCluskey (pcm@rahul.net)
Date: Sun Dec 15 1996 - 12:09:21 MST
70023.3041@CompuServe.COM (Paul Wakfer) writes:
>1. Being alive is the irreducible primary to all other values. Without it
>obtaining, all others are meaningless. Therefore, it must rationally have the
>highest of all possible values in ones hierarchy. This implies that its value
>(if comparable at all - see my next point) must rationally be extremely much
>higher than the value of, say, going out to dinner and a movie once a week.
While a person must be alive to hold values, that doesn't imply a
need to value continuation of life.
I see nothing irrational about valuing one's children's wellbeing
highly enough that one is prepared to accept instant death in
return for increased happiness of one's children. (I don't hold such
a value system, I merely see nothing objectively wrong with it).
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Peter McCluskey | | "Don't blame me. I voted pcm@rahul.net | http://www.rahul.net/pcm | for Kodos." - Homer Simpson pcm@quote.com | http://www.quote.com |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:53 MST