2

Has any philosopher, ever, claimed that the life of some people is of no value whatsoever?

Not just that someone is e.g. dangerous, but some people can have no moral claim whatsoever to life?

Conversely, has anyone claimed that human life does not have a universal equivalent, by which I just mean a means to measure out the value of any and all human life?

13
  • by "null value" do you mean "no value" or do you mean "null" in the way it is used in programming and databases?
    – virmaior
    Apr 18 '16 at 2:57
  • i just no value i think, i don't program !
    – user6917
    Apr 18 '16 at 2:58
  • @virmaior is that ok, the two questions like that ?
    – user6917
    Apr 18 '16 at 3:17
  • 2
    'Theres no scientific consensus that life is important!' - Futurama Apr 18 '16 at 12:08
  • 1
    Probably not what you're looking for, but the philosophical position of antinatalism assigns negative value to life and birth in general. Otherwise, a list of e.g. eugenics or nazi ideologues may be a good place to start.
    – w128
    Apr 18 '16 at 18:17
0

I would say that Mein Kampf is the strongest example I know of that speaks directly to the question you've asked. He speaks to the purity of the aryan race and degrades other races as inferior.

Another good example would be Joseph Stalin (moral nihilist).

Mao Tse-tung's red book is another example that presents national superiority.

5
  • 5
    But are politicians philosophers?
    – user9166
    Apr 18 '16 at 17:57
  • Are they not philosophers because they apply a practical application to philosophy instead of discourse on rhetoric? That describes a Platonic Sophist, not a philosopher. Your very comment, therefore, also falls into sophistry and not philosophy by the same definition and is not constructive. Apr 20 '16 at 14:13
  • 1
    Those guys were not philosophers. Not because they were politicians, but simply because they didn't do philosophy. Having an opinion (even expressed in the form of a book) doesn't make you a philosopher.
    – Eliran
    May 6 '16 at 20:08
  • 1
    @EliranH I would go even further and say that even if the books were philosophy, that doesn't make the authors philosophers. You don't have to be a professional philosopher to be a philosopher, but you do have to be a philosopher.
    – Era
    May 6 '16 at 20:34
  • dwai @jobermark it was a quirk
    – user35983
    Mar 14 '19 at 0:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy