wCHAP.29

(4/4/02)

CHAPTER XXIX

HOW MUCH IS A HUMAN LIFE WORTH?

In a Science of Ethics the individual human being is the only worthy focus of ultimate concern. In a philosophical sense each person's life is of infinite value. It is the criteria against which everything else is measured and valued. But in a practical sense no society has infinite knowledge and infinite resources. Therefore, at some level every society always has to put a practical value on the life of its citizens. And by doing so indicates how near or far it is from being an Enlightened Community. Traditionally, some societies have placed this value based on the standing of the individual's family in the community: king, princess, lord of the manor, peasant, pauper, etc. Others in terms of financial resources. Some in terms of power: military leader, dictator, Pope, etc. Etc. But every society judges some of its members's lives as more valuable than others. They have a way of determining whose life is worth more and whose is worth less.

But how should an Enlightened Community arrive at this value? Part of this issue is strict survival of the society. An Enlightened Person places the survival of the Community above their own survival because their value depends on the existence of the community. Without the community their existence would have no value. Their life work and long term goals would be tied into the existence of the Community, so its continued existence has great emotional and intellectual value.

An Enlightened Community's prime goal would be to expand resources so that persons would not need to die for lack of access to trivial resources: food, shelter, simple medical treatment, etc. But at any given time there are a finite number of resources and finite knowledge.

What demand can any member of an Enlightened Community fairly make on available resources in order to prolong their life? First, we would ask what total expenditures would be needed, over what period of time? With what result? Is the person surviving in a vegetative state with no likelihood of regaining consciousness? What quality of life is likely to be achieved by this expenditure, or along with it? Can the person only be sustained with great continuing effort?

What is the payback for society? Is the individual able to strengthen or maintain the human bond with family, friends, the rest of society? Are they able to advance goals of society by increasing knowledge about the condition they suffer and ways it can be prevented or corrected? Can they add to some other area of social significance such as finding ways to tap into nature's abundant wealth that lies only waiting for the knowledge to do so?

It seems clear to me that it would be wrong for the many to go without treatment, possibly of a life threatening condition, so that a few would have access to vast quantities of resources necessary to maintain their life.

The above exists when resources must be diverted from growth and development, or better usage:

--to maintain only the vegetative state. This is definitely unacceptable.

--especially when vast expenditures are necessary to maintain a person in a terminal condition in great pain. This is definitely unacceptable.

But how can decisions be made in specific cases?

Although an Enlightened Community would do everything possible to provide each person the highest quality life current resources allowed, How would it deal with those areas not yet liberated by knowledge? Suppose it should be necessary to assemble an army? How would these dangerous positions be filled? What priority would curing disease, deformity have? Suppose it is deemed necessary to put an end to tyranny in some place? How would such a military police action be assembled? How would education, training, development of abilities be financed? Would capital punishment exist? How would employment be valued? Etc.?

Although this discussion raises more questions than it answers, I think there are answers to many of these questions and they just need to be assembled and their value made clear based on the question: Does this solution provide more or fewer persons a Sustainable Feeling that their LIfe Has Meaning?