About the value of a person

Post Reply New Topic

Hello dear Wrong Planet, long time no see!

I wonder if anyone still remembers me. I used to be an active member from 2012 to 2014. And now I'm here again. I'll post a proper intro in the appropriate subforum later, for now let's get to the discussion!

Now, this is going to be a difficult and probably triggering topic for some people, which is why I specifically chose PPR. The main trigger is ableism, so if that's a problem for you then here be dragons, do not thread past this point

I have a deep set belief that a person's worth is derived from the positive impact and influence that they have within their own community. I judge myself and others based on this belief. And I mean, it makes a lot of sense. It doesn't even have to be about money or work, people who make art, who are compassionate and nurturing and bring peace and joy to everyone around them, they are quite valuable.

And consequently, people who are unable to contribute to those around them, who take more than what they receive, are not very valuable.

And my rational mind cannot see for the life of it the flaws in this line of reasoning. This is even part of the social contract; everyone contributing for the common good from their own strengths, with no freeloaders who burden the community by taking without giving back.

Now I am well aware of the counterpoint. All lives have intrinsic worth. We are ok just the way we are, we are all valuable and worthy of love. And when you approach this with compassion, empathy, love, this counterpoint becomes self-evident. A paradigm

But my rational mind doesn't quite agree with this, therefore it can't quite accept this paradigm. Even if I don't take into account capitalist beliefs that associate worth with achievement and productivity, let's take a text with deeper truths, the Bhagavad Gita. One of the learnings I've received by studying it is that a person's duty is to serve their community and to fulfill their duties. So if someone is hindered from serving because of disabilities, or constantly shirks or underperforms in his duties because of something like, let's say, procrastination and executive dysfunction (yeah you may see where am I coming from), then isn't that person simply not doing their just part for their community? Isn't it logical then, that they should have less worth in its eyes?

I wouldn't even be comfortable myself on depending on other people's compassion (pity?) to survive. Or if I am constantly letting down everyone around me, I wouldn't and I'm not ok with thinking that I'm still valuable or worthy of love or anything, if I haven't done anything to deserve it or earn it.

I hope this doesn't sound too whiny or self-defeating, This is PPR, pretty much the opposite of The Haven so this is a space for truth, not comfort. So now what I'd like to discuss: is there a rational justification for not measuring people by what they contribute to society?

SHATBAT!! !! *Big hugs!! !* I’ve missed you!

The only thing I can think of is either pity like you said, or the person being vulnerable in some way and appears cute because of it. I think if the whole group is struggling with too much work and/or a lack of resources then resentment would build up and people would get uptight more about contributions from the whole group. Otherwise I’m not sure why that resentment would exist.

Hey there *hugs back* yeah it's been a long while! But I'll be around again~

Indeed. I can see how a community may be willing to support unproductive or underproductive members during times of plenty, but it would be in their best interests to stop doing it when times get hard and there is a lack of resources for everyone. So here the idea of intrinsic worth falls out of the window :/

<activating critical thinking mode>
<analytics algorithm activated>
<loading...>
<searching contextual parameters>
<analysing content cohesiveness>
<activating emotion recognition algorithm>
<loading...>
<conclusion assessment algorithm activated>
<Loading...>
<working...>
<working...>
<working...>
<assessment complete>
<assessment: 95% valid>

I think we're culturally in a dangerous spot because the whole 'merits of work' thing seems to be getting increasingly oblique. It looks like the number of people who are technically unemployable will increase steadily with our technological changes and the question really becomes - do we have the capacity to switch our habits/modes of being to deal with that sort of change?

We're also getting to a place where the UN could hit its goals to defeat abject poverty by 2030. While I'm sure there still will be charitable work that needs to be done for people less well off I'm starting to wonder if that well of meaning will be drying up as well (unless we omit UBI in which case the homeless shelters and soup kitchens will be quite busy). All of this raises a lot of questions about how we'd even approach shifting ourselves off of what we've traditionally considered the basis for human worth.

IDK I think a lot of stuff is twisted up and upside down...like yes I think contribution is important for value, but I certainly see it different than the capitalistic mindset. Like I look at what are you 'really' doing for the community...does having a job per say nessisarily help the community? What if you have a job in a toxic industry that is hurting the planet for instance...but maybe it was the best available opportunity? Is that helping the community? Not really but its helping someone somewhere make money probably more money than the actual workers doing the dangerous/harmful labor. Are you helping the community if you don't go out of your way to recycle? No...however its not necessarily fair to point the finger at people not going out of their way for this...city planners and state governments should be trying to ensure there are proper trash and recycling facilities available to the public.

But yeah I think value is all twisted around, its seen as people with the most material resources are seen as the most valuble...and people with the least amount of resources are seen as less valuable. But I do not believe value comes from material wealth. A lot of people lead successful lives without 'helping the community'...maybe it shouldn't be that way.

The English language is pretty clear: a person's worth is what they have, period. In Spanish, you have to be slightly more roundabout and say, "Tanto tienes, tanto vales".

I don't believe anyone owes anybody else anything and I don't think any human life is worth any more than any other, regardless of what that person does or doesn't do. I believe we're all equal. I know other people don't though and I know they turn their noses up when they find out I'm unemployed. But I just don't subscribe to that belief that you're only worth what you do, it doesn't seem right, doesn't seem humane.

Then lemme assault and rob you, and abandon you naked and empty-handed in the middle of the wilderness, and let’s see if you still don’t believe I owe you anything or your life is worth any more than that of a scoundrel like me.

For me, the anger is not on people who can’t contribute to society.

The anger is on people in a fit enough state to contribute, but won’t.

I judge the worth of a person based on their vibrational level, though that is opening another can of worms.