Equality of Value of Life

The scope of this paper will examine the notion of equality with respect to the value of life as it is contained in the argument between Tom Regan and R.G. Frey. Regan maintains that “all who have inherent value have it equally” (Regan 66). Frey, conversely, maintains that not all lives can be of equal inherent value since the potential for enrichment is not equal for all lives. Taking both arguments into consideration, the remainder of this paper will attempt to reconcile these arguments, suggesting that a sensible compromise is possible.

Regan supports his argument with the following premises :

1. All human life is of equal inherent value solely because each human is an experiencing subject of life.

2. All experiencing subjects of life have equal inherent value in and of themselves (regardless of any additional qualifying characteristics).

3. Therefore, “all [experiencing subjects of life] who have inherent value have it equally” (Regan 66).

Before continuing, a definition of ‘experiencing subject of life’ (ESL) is in order. Regan defines an ESL as a “conscious creature having an individual welfare that has importance to [itself] whatever [their] usefulness to others” (65). In essence, an ESL is anything conscious of its existence with an interest in its own welfare, regardless of their value to others. This is important for animal rights supporters like Regan, since it encompasses the lives of sentient animals and gives all conscious beings equal inherent value (except in specific life threatening situations). An example of this can be elucidated in the case of a reclusive bum with no family, job or responsibilities. Clearly, for this case at least, the bum has no usefulness to others. Yet, since he is a consci...

... middle of paper ...

...er purposefully or accidentally is unclear) allowing for one to devalue their own life if they choose. I argue that this can only be achieved by weighing the value of life and allowing for those who deem their life to be of less value to end it at their discretion.

These exceptions do not infringe upon the equal inherent value for persons who are conscious and/or value their life but concurrently allow for situations in which equal weighting of life value is counterintuitive. As a result, all ESL remain equal but things outside the realm of consideration for ESL can have disproportionate -less- value.

I contend that the compromise, set forth above appeals to both Regan and Frey. For Regan, it preserves equal inherent value, animals and persons alike, while also considering and allowing for Frey’s exceptions for those with low or deteriorating quality of life.