What makes a person valuable?

by fatboy1234 (student)

AS and A Level Religious Studies & Philosophy

Tanmim Hanifa What makes a person valuable? R.E Essay Mr Bauly

The purpose of this essay is to explore the question ‘What makes a person valuable?’ in my own personal opinion, and not just of the question, but also the two parts of this question which is also to define my own perception of what makes a creature a person, and what allows for such creatures to be valuable. Now there are many ways of defining what a person is, and the most common one is that they have to be a human, a homosapien, someone with arms, legs, head, brains and all the features which are found in the most commonly defined ‘human’, it is just their appearance which is defines their humanity and also the way their body works and such. But what makes a ‘person’ is a different question. A definition of what makes a person will vary from different people’s opinions and views, I will express my view of what a ‘person’ is and how they are defined as such. I believe what makes human beings to be considered a person can be defined with many different arguments and these can be due to their consciousness, significance and social definition. I will explain my views on each of these and show my opinion on how these can potentially be the answer and also argue against each of them before giving my finale verdict on what I believe to make a person valuable.

First definition is by their consciousness, their rational reasoning of one situation and generally understanding and knowledge about what is deemed to be right or wrong. But one can not have no conscious at all as it all about acknowledgement of what is right and what is wrong, this is just thought, however those whose consciousness are very high would follow the righteous actions as opposed to doing the opposite and this makes them very conscious, however those who commit crime and do wrong will have lower conscious as they surely know what is right and what is wrong however they decide to commit the wrong doings as their rational thinking isn’t very good compared to those who are kind and wouldn’t commit a crime, such people have low conscious levels. That’s what makes someone a person or more of a person than others. For example, a murderer who has little consciousness at all in his mind, can’t be deemed as a ‘person’ since they didn’t rationally look at their action and that is why they took another person’s life away, since they committed the crime they overlooked at the fact that it is completely wrong, bypassing the definition of a person from the conscious point. But on the other hand, those who help the homeless can be deemed to be more of a person as their level of conscious dictates the right rational thinking and then go on to do good things. This person is more of a person, a person being defined on the basis of their conscious. In this case, who is more of a person? The murderer or the one who helps the homeless? Or are they both equal in the sense of personhood?

This is a preview of the whole essay

On the other hand, there would inevitably be people who disagree with this idea of how a being is defined to be a person as it wouldn’t be fair to use this on those who are less able than others, as because their moral consciousness would be quite low since they are less able and some would not have the same intelligence as compared to those who are actually considered to be more of a person, does this make them less of a person? In spite of that, a point could be that those who willingly choose to act as if their consciousness levels are lower from those who are good intentionally, are the ones that are less of a person as they are doing the wrong out of their own accord, their own will, it’s what they are choosing to do and vice versa to those who are deemed to be morally good. So use this point for those who are less able, they are not intentionally less able than others, they didn’t choose to be like that, they were either born that way or an experience later in life may have caused this, therefore they shouldn’t be considered less of a person as their moral consciousness had been altered from a disability or suffering they are battling without it really being their choice. They did not choose their consciousness to be like that as they have limited control over it as opposed to those who have near full control, yet do the wrong actions while knowing that it is not right. So those whose consciousness is willingly lowered can be considered less of a person compared to those whose consciousness is high off their own choice, but those who are limited by their struggles, can’t fall into the category of being deemed less human since it is not of their own will and choice.

Furthermore, those who disagree with consciousness defining a person can also argue that a baby has no consciousness as they have no awareness or rational thoughts about certain situations, they don’t know what is right or wrong as they don’t understand much, but does this make them less of a person? On the other hand, some people may counter argue against this pointing out that they do have a certain level of consciousness as they cry when they are hungry; this shows they have some understanding. But however, dogs do this as well; they bark, start salivating and run to their owner when they are hungry, which is the same instinct as the baby’s. If these two beings are similar in their actions, this should surely make their consciousness levels at a similar level. Does this make the dog a person on the same level as a baby?

Now onto the argument where a person is defined by significance, I think this case isn’t looking at the fact at how significant a person is to society but is explaining that a person is a true person when the give significance to another being or a thing. Some people believe that this is what makes a person, when a being makes an object or someone please, be important in their life. For example a mobile phone, in many peoples life this is very important to them and this shows that the person has given significance to this object. This is what is believed to define a person as they are expressing emotion to an object, a person has the power to make a thing be so important to them and also create a kind of bond to this object where they would keep it safe and treat it like another being in essence. But however using this as an argument to define what a person is can be counter argued as dogs and various other animals have been proven to show significance of an object or even a person to themselves. For example a dog, when they are very fond of their owner that shows they’re giving significance to the owner, does this make them a person? And furthermore dogs have also been proven to give significance to an object that they favour. Take a dog who chews on a toy every day, if one was to take that toy away from them and give them an alternative, they wouldn’t chew or play with that toy as the one that has been taken away from them, has significant value to them. These attributes are the same as those of a human being; does this make the dog a person on the same level as us?

Now onto another point, that a person is a person based on their social definition. This clearly states, by the name itself, that a person is a person only at the fact in which they act, talk and live their life accordingly. However I strongly oppose against this as it is actually a biased view since a person will view someone else as a person based on how they act, and only can really be accepted if they are similar to themselves. If we take this definition agree to it being right will only increase racism amongst everyone as one would see another being, who are different to them socially, would not be considered a person. Many people will have been brought up in different societies, demining them to be different to other people; this shouldn’t change the fact that they’re still a person. For example the feral child, who was brought up by a pack of wolves which made her behave similar to that of wolves, but since her upbringing made her socially different to others, does this make her less of a person and should now be considered an animal as opposed to being a person? She didn’t have the luxury of being raised up in a society which promotes co-operation and harmony, this wasn’t her choice, she had the potential to be more like a human as opposed to being a wolf, but however her upbringing, which wasn’t of her choice, didn’t allow that so it isn’t her fault that had become like a wolf, is she an animal or a person? This is why social definition shouldn’t define a ‘person’. Also race and tradition shouldn’t be a part of this argument as one can’t really choose were to be brought and how to be brought up, traditions and cultures are different therefore everyone will socially different to one another, and instead of alienating one another, we should consider everyone a person based on another reason other than this as this is prejudice morally segregation of who are and who aren’t a person.

Now I will explain my view on what I think makes a person, a ‘person’. I believe that there some elements of each of the above explanations which put together can define a person more effectively than just using one of those arguments to define a person. My opinion is that a person is a person when they are aware of what is wrong and what is right, but only if they are able to understand this as some people are less able than others and may not understand this point. The reason why I agree is that consciousness means they would also have emotion, and emotion plays a strong part in what separates us from other animals, especially when we can feel empathy towards one another, and this is a part of our consciousness as we are acknowledging their pain, and knowing what they are going through and we show that act of empathy by helping each other out. This also contributes to consciousness defining a person as we are rationally making decisions on a situation, not just for our own benefit, but also at the fact that it should benefit others. Animals however have a survival instinct where they are all for themselves, they battle each other for food and shelter in order to survive. However a human, brought up in a society shows empathy as they are willing to help out in the society, allowing those less fortunate than themselves to survive. I believe this is what makes a person and also this is what makes a person valuable, which answers the essay question. However there are more reasons at what I think makes a person valuable. And that is their intention and belief. Their intention defines who they are as it illustrates what they want to achieve, this makes a person valuable as they are willing to complete a goal, they gave their action a purpose, why do an action if without a purpose? That’s meaningless, that can also be used to show how a person is valuable. Their belief. For example, in Islam we believe in Allah, and our intention is to follow his commands and do right for the good of humanity such as helping out the homeless and less fortunate, that is a part of our intention, that is our reason to be living, that I what makes us valuable as we have a goal to achieve and that is to become a good Muslim and follow the Qur’an. Without this intention, there really wouldn’t be a meaning to life, as what is the ultimate goal. You don’t live just to grow up, learn, get a job, make a living and just die. We all have a purpose in this life, everyone is valuable, and their beliefs make them valuable as they are giving themselves a life goal. Take for example an atheist who doesn’t believe in god and argues that human race has happened by chance. They don’t have no intentions but to have a good life and make a living; however does this make their lives valuable? If so, then to whom does it make their life valuable in their sense? Society? Or a greater being such as god? This is why I believe a persons value is given to them by themselves, depending on their intentions in life and also their beliefs. A Muslim person will see themselves as valuable since they believe they have a goal to complete, to please Allah. A person who doesn’t believe in any faiths would deem themselves as less valuable since they have no ultimate goal.