View Single Post
Old 2008-01-13, 20:17   Link #1
Bornsatin
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Toronto
Age: 25
Send a message via MSN to Bornsatin
The Logic of Consequence: A Metaphysical(?)Approach

Firstly, you'll probably avoid reading this, I realise how scary all this text seems. I 'unno, save it for when you're bored?
It's simplified english, as I've made it. So if you feel it's too complicated for you to comphrehend just because of it's language, it shouldn't be a concern.
If this religiously offends you, my apologies.
This was initially a discussion me and a friend had regarding the dilemma of a murder and it's consequences. This is what I concluded and (sort of) documented.

To understand my theory it is very important that you know what the term life defines.
Life as I see it, is the will to exist individually, to grow and reproduce. The word 'will' here is used very literally. It is cruel to it's meaning that you understand what this means.
______________________

-Does the human life carry any essential value?
We all know we do matter, as an entity. But it is very important to understand why and what conditions needs to be satisfied in order for us to carry any significance.

For instance:
For the sake of argument, a man who spends his own life in solitary confinement and dies, (practically speaking) never mattered at all. No one had to shed tears, and even though materialisticly his absence would've been noticed, that was where it ended. "If a tree fell in the woods and non one heard it, did it make a sound?" That concept is being applied here.

On the contrary, if that man leads a normal life and meets people, interacts and relates to them, his death would now matter. His death would create new emotions and influence everyone he has known just as his life did.

From this we can conclude that life has no 'essential' value. An individual within itself carries no influence without another entity it could influence, which happens to be one of the conditions that have to be satisfied for something to carry value. Hence my life as a person carries no value but our lives as people do. So life holds a 'relative' value. We are important to others is why we are important to ourselves.

___________________________________________


-Now here's where it gets complicated. To define anything to begin with, something of contrast should be established.

For example:
One cannot know what how small something is until he has seen something bigger. There has to be difference, something of an opposing value to define one. Life would carry no meaning if death wasn't an inevitable fact. Hence we say that death is the absence of life.

So to define the value of a human life, we need something of comparison.

-What does carry true value?
The Big Bang Theory states that the universe started from a 1-dimensional point the size of an atom, so there had to be 'will' present for it to disperse and then infinitely expand. Which would mean, if we ever decided to travel towards the edge or the center of the universe, we'll always be infinitely distant from it.. eh?
Now think of life, it's value is nothing because it started from nothing and to balance the equation, it would have to end in nothing. With me so far?

-But the universe started from something, we we are almost certain of. So the universe does carry value. So far:
Our lives don't carry value individually
The universe does carry a value
And 'we' constitute(make up) the universe.

________________________________________

-So yes, individual life carries no value. But when two lives relate, as in a relationship.. that has value. And all relations, material and non-material (physical and spiritual) eventually constitute the universal value.

-Hence when a murder kills someone, he has caused something of negative value to happen. In order to counter this, a positive value has to be formed, to keep balance. So a living being somewhere else is born (not necessairily human) and since the universe which could be taken to have the value '1', it is infinitely and exponentially expanding, as in.. 1X1X1X1 no matter how may times you multiply it, the 'essential' value which the universe carries is inaffected. Sine the amount of matter never changes as it all started from the same 1-dimensional point. Everything has 'expanded' rather than increasing.

So the value stays the same no matter what. But when a person dies, in a sense value has been in that particular place lost.
Here's the dilemma, do we imprison/execute (punish) the killer?

Ofcourse, this is all just my theory, hardly even strong basis for an ethical paradox. And as a friend of mine did, most of you would impulsively answer 'yes'. But the execution (the killers death) doesn't directly bring positive value to the situation so for the person who died, it really changes nothing at all.


-Now Metaphysically, all humans should be able to go around killing each other without consequences, the strongest survive and form a most efficient and positive community till they eventually die out an somewhere out there in the billion stars, an alien specie replaces us. But that would be an eugenic concept and that is ethically wrong.
-Ethically speaking, taking another life is a crime, a sin, it's not against human nature but it's against the natural law that governs the human nature. That nature should left alone to do it's own job, eventually and naturally kill this human. (although some would consider murder that too)
Ofcourse they need to be punished for them to 'learn' a lesson but there is no gurantee to this, so we end up ruining another human life so other's can feel safer.. a selfish motive? Is that ethical? I'm quite honestly ambivalent.


Here, do you side (support) physics or ethics?

__________________________________________________ _________________________

FAQ's

-No matter what happens, this universal value is unaffected?
Infinity square root 2 is till infinity, but you couldn't say it hasn't lost value, right?

-Does material relationship affect value?
Yes, but the subject is living human beings, lets keep it spiritual.

-How does this value end?
A loves B, B loves A. They both die and with it their memories which carried the value of their relationship hence that value is now lost. If only one of them dies, 'some' value is lost.
It would result similarly if they both lost their memories. So memory plays a part, and death does end it since the neurons and philotes in your brain decompose into simpler substances and information is lost.

-Aren't everyday values 'feelings'?
No, values are mere numbers to lay the basics of a metaphysical argument. Values aren't classified (or catagorized) as feelings are, hence they are different.

__________________________________________________ ____________________________

Please point out any flaws, opinions, criticism. This is metaphysics, not religion. So please refrain from dragging in the inaccuracies of the Big Bang theory... since I'll be at a faliure to answer.

Last edited by Bornsatin; 2008-01-14 at 16:59.
Bornsatin is offline   Reply With Quote