For ages, humanity has wrestled with the idea of life, along with one’s privileges and rights. Through old and ancient civilizations humanity has learned to create and maintain an perfect utopia. But even to the most advanced civilizations that we have encountered, how much do they think we are worth? Could they even begin to express the value behind a person and his/her life? How would it be measured? Would humans be priced by the elements they’re composed of? Would it be measured by a person’s health and life expectancy? How about traits, how would those be put into account? Would a person who is fit to work in rigorous places be worth more than a person who is tech savvy? All these questions will need to be addressed. No one is the same. The fact that some many people have strived in order to receive what one deserves. Not everyone makes the same amount of money. Some people work more, and others work less. Some make more and others make less, no one is worth the same price because no one in this world is the same as the next. I agree with how life insurance works because if one can afford it due to the fact that one has worked hard enough to get the money one need to pay for it. It is thought that everyone should be labeled the same price because everyone is human and inside everyone is the same, but that is not the case no one is exactly like the other. By someone earning more income in life than the others, that shows that on the outside they've lived all totally separate lives and therefore need the different amounts of money when a loved one passes. The fact that everyone is different gives society a reason to put a monetary value on people.
No one has the same amount to knowledge for instance. A person that is a genius w...
... middle of paper ...
...n or woman already or have been in a family that is rich so that rich person comes from a family that is already rich. The poor man should get more money than a rich person because if the poor man had a job but lost it and looked for a job but could not get one. Then the poor man should get more money than the rich man so the poor mans family could bury him.
Works Cited
Feinberg, Kenneth. “What is the Value of a Human Life?” This I Believe. National Public Radio, 25
May 2008. Web
Jobs, Steve. Commencement Address. Stanford University Commencement Weekend. Stanford.
CA. 12 June 2005. Address html>. Jones, Chris. “Roger Ebert: The Essential Man.” Esquire 16 Feb. 2010 Web.
Ripley, Amanda “What Is a Life Worth?” Time 11 Feb. 2002. 22-27. Print.
“What is a human life worth?” will always be a question that I don’t quite know the answer to. No matter what you do, how you chose to value your life is entirely up you. Everyone lives life differently so the monetary value of a person will be different. Whether you believe all lives should be handled as equal or if you chose to invest in life insurance, you cannot find the true value of life when thinking of all those legalities. Happiness is what the value of life ultimately should be all
Though money may not be the root of all evil, it certainly contributes to inequalities between those on opposite ends of the wealth distribution map. Upward mobility becomes difficult for those whose income does not match that of the wealthy because of the lack of opportunities provided to the people who are in the working class (Marx). Unfortunately, this repetitive cycle of wealth inequality draws parallels with the racial inequalities that are seen today. Statistically, people of color and women collect less revenue than white men, who are less restricted in their mobility, in America (Rowe). According to Karl Marx, money can buy anything from education to beauty, due to the fact that money is valued more than the lives of those who do
Michael, T. (1998) 'Personhood' in Kuhse & Singer (eds.) A Companion to Bioethics. New Jersey:
Every cultures has their own way to define the values. What could be of value in one country could be invaluable in a different country. For example, in Mexico there are places within the same country where the values are measured in different types of ways, such as; in a low-income scenario morality is of great value and in a high-income scenario money and power determine their values of life in a different manor. Everything depends in the social background you are born into that determines how you will live life this term would be called ascribed status” a position an individual either inherits at birth or receives involuntarily later in life”(Henslin, 2015, pg.102).
A great deal of people within a mass of different cultures contain talents and special abilities of all shapes and sizes. In many cases, the way people perform these specialized talents directly correlates with how they value their lives. Amanda Ripley, author of the article, “What is a Life Worth?”tackles the topic of defining whether a price or value can be placed on a person’s life. By using statistical data and anecdotal evidence from the attacks on 9/11, she touches on each side of the argument efficiently. Although she does mention that a value may be a necessity when granting compensation to loved ones of the victims of national disasters, I personally believe that this action is impossible. The value of each person’s individual talents and unique abilities forms an inability to place price tags on human life. These special gifts, although priceless as is, provide worth to extraneous areas of life as well. For example, my greatest talent in life is my ability to pitch a baseball. By pitching well, I contribute to winning many games for the teams I play on, and by winning games, my team brings joy to themselves and to the fans enjoying the game. Because a price tag cannot be placed on emotions, my ability to pitch, which brings joy or sadness to different people, is also impossible to be priced. Because the personal abilities of each and every person add to the productivity in a seemingly unending amount, it is improbable that a value can be placed on the life of a human
In the United States, the gap between the rich and the poor has been substantially increasing over the years. This growth between the rich and poor illustrates the wealth inequality between the social classes in our nation. Although it is impractical to precisely measure the morality of wealth inequality, we can use philosophical thought to determine what makes a political and economic system just. By analyzing the theories of political philosophers, Robert Nozick and John Rawls, it is clear that wealth inequality is morally justified, as long as equal opportunity and concern for justice among a society is provided under certain conditions.
Everyone has his or her own ideas of how wealth should be distributed properly. Some people believe wealth should be left to family, left for public services, or become the property of others. Others believe that people should not have excess wealth, resulting in non-existent class distinctions. An alternative view is that wealth is not distributed; instead, the wealthy continue to grow wealthier while those in poverty can not escape it and fall further into a life of poverty. The beliefs discussed above come from three different writers. Those writers include Andrew Carnegie, Karl Marx, and Robert B. Reich. These writers all have different opinions on how wealth should be distributed properly.
Keown, John. "The Value of Human Life." Euthanasia, Ethics, and Public Policy: An Argument against Legalisation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2002. 39. Print.
Eckstein, Cheryl. "Can There Ever Be A 'Right To Be Killed'?" Citizen 25 July. 1995. http://www.awinc.com/partners/bc/commpass/lifenet/canthere.htm (27 Feb. 1997)
Gow, Haven Bradford. "Not Applying the Death Penalty is Cruel, Immoral, and Unjust." Human Events Vol. 52 Issue 45 (26 Nov. 1996): 22.
Singer, Peter. "Freedom and the Right to Die." Online Opinion. 2002: p.1-3. Online. Internet. http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/2002/May02/Singer.htm. (28 Sept 2003).
There are many rich and poor people in the world today, in our own country and in others. We have classified by how much they can afford and they are put into a class system. It’s hard for everyone in a country to be equal in the sense of how much money they make. Adriana Delgado says, “The vast differences between the rich and the poor, the powerful and the powerless, will be the catalyst for the best intentions to be rewarded with ungratefulness and contempt, creating resentment and mistrust between the classes.” there is always going to be problems between the rich and poor, because one sometimes is held higher than the
The question of “What is the good life?” is one that I was challenged with by Professor Curta on that first day of class in mid-August. Over the course of a few short months I have examined the many aspects of this question while at the same time applying the concepts to my own life. Everyone’s answer to this age old question is a little different, and is completely dependent on the influences and goals of the individual. To me the good life consists of having a stable future and a group of close friends to spend it with. But like all good things, this does not come without a cost. For me these costs are, having to leave some of my childhood friends behind. As hard as this may be I know that it is for the better, and I keep my eyes on the task at hand, in the hopes of finding that good life.
Human life is full of meaning. As humans, we assign value to many things. However, what happens when we assign a specific value to a human life? This is the issue being presented in the article, “What is a Life Worth,” by Amanda Ripley. The government determines a monetary value to a human life, and it does not appeal to the masses.
Collins, Sara (1993, June 7). Saving lives isn't cheap. U.S. News & World Report, p. 56.