Justice, Episode 2

6 Responses to Justice, Episode 2

1. American Girl says:

   October 12, 2009 at 6:34 pm

   I am still of the opinion that you cannot put a price on life.

   In some areas of the world, life is cheap. You can off someone for $20.00. You can buy an AR15 for $100.00 where merely owning an AR15 can be the difference between life and death.

   A questions to the Romans, how much would you have to pay someone in order to torture that person? How much to kill them? Perhaps if someone were dying a painful death, they would pay to be killed?

   What I find appalling is when a corporation, a non-natural person decides the value of a natrual person’s life.

   For discussion purposes, I am curious to know what people think about this following scnario. The fact in this scenario have been slightly modified to avoid identifying the victim and defendant:

   Defendant accidentally killed a man in a car accident. Liability was not a question, the defendant was at fault. The issue was, how much was the victim worth? The victim was an unemployed, living off welfare and owed $20,000 in unpaid taxes to the State. He was not involved in the community, did not volunteer, generally unliked by his neighbors, considered a nuisance in his town and he was a frequent flyer at the local county jail. His only family was a sister and nephew who he visited only on Christmas for dinner. He did not have a good repoir with sister or nephew, but they put up with him because victim had no other family. When victim was killed, defendant was sued by sister for wrongful death. In the deposition, sister did not have many nice things to say about her relationship with the victim. How much is that person’s life worth? How much should the sister be paid to make her whole? how much should the sister be paid for the suffering her brother felt when he died in that collision?
2. jaehwan says:

   October 13, 2009 at 12:11 pm

   How much is that person’s life worth? How much should the sister be paid to make her whole? how much should the sister be paid for the suffering her brother felt when he died in that collision?

   Not much, in my opinion. Who was she suing for wrongful death? If it was the defendant’s fault, then there shouldn’t be any kind of remuneration for the incident.

   Come to think of it, even if it was the other person’s fault, she shouldn’t get anything either. They had a bad relationship, right?

   I agree with you that there are problems putting a price on life. With automobiles, lives are saved by fast moving cars like ambulances while ended by reckless drivers in other cars, so we have to find a balance. I remember reading a Doonesbury cartoon where a politician wants to raise the speed limit, and his opponent accuses him of being a mass murder since more people would die. Money is the easiest way to quantify choices, but it offends our sense of right and wrong.

   I liked the part about higher vs. lower pleasures. I think it’s a question that novelists face in the debate between literary fiction and genre fiction. I think there does exist a difference, but it’s possible for something like the Simpsons to have a huge effect on society because of that accessibility.

   By the way, it was funny to see the Asian dude speak against minority interests while the White woman speak for them. It wasn’t a race thing, of course, but funny nevertheless. (To give credit where credit is due, a 44 pointed this out:

   http://www.thefighting44s.com/forum/showthread.php?p=49701#post49701

   )
3. Jason says:

   October 14, 2009 at 5:25 am

   Ford Pinto!
   Something we get in our ethics in engineering classes… Woop woop woop woop.

   I believe that the actual calculation for the “Cost of Life” was actually the cost of (and specifically) the associated legal fees for the predicted number of cases. And the lawyers on the prosecution had actually placed it as a figure on the “Cost of Life”. Because it was a number that was associated with a casualty.

   [Actually I'm pretty sure it was the case, I recall actually having seen the calculation used in Ford's report. And with their figures, I recall the difference in the cost-benefit analysis was astronomical. (Which was between the associated legal fees, and the laber + parts + other work that would have gone into a recall)]

   Another item, that deals largely with cost-benefits are traffic provisions (stop lights, turn-a-bouts/traffic circles, yeild signs, lanes, length of on/off ramps, speed limits, etc) In most cities, the DoT type entity will typically look at a certain provisions:
   Accident Rate
   Traffic (Congestion)
   Implementation of another provision (how much it will decrease accident frequency and traffic congestion)

   By a typical analysis, usually a change to a traffic provision wouldn’t happen until the accident rate, is high enough that the cost of the traffic provision seems worth it.

   A lot of times, in the public eye, the cost of implementation is a waste of money. But in a particular case of an “Overpass” to service a small neighborhood in my hometown (Juneau, AK) to greatly reduce the risk of turning onto the highway were terrible. Especially with the heavy, fog we would get seasonally (Think that the heavy fog for the Willamette Valley seems like nothing: Something like 20 ft of visibility, possibilities of black ice, and traffic crossings and stop lights on a 4 lane high way) We basically learned to drive by following the tail lights of the next car in front of you. Cause thats the only thing you could see. And there had been plenty of horrible accidents at the location of the overpass in question, and stop lights further down (the stop light because a few people wouldn’t slow down when you were near them (given away by the presence of streetlights) in case the light was actually red.
   But needless to say, since there was no way for people turning at the new overpass location to aid anyone turning onto the highway there accidents were a little bit more common.
   It was seriously an item of discussion for at least a decade before it was made and mostly because the cost of building it wouldn’t “be worth it.”

   You know what is really weird – when dealing with the general public, the analysis must be done with the utilitarian perspective. Well, not really, because you would need to do so to ensure that the publics interest is taken care of, instead of the individuals.

   AG:
   Like you, I would never place a price to a life. However, I would place a value to his contributions – but a mans contributions to society belong to society and not the man, nor his sister. His sister, if she chooses to do so, may provide a proper (western) burial. With the high cost of funerals – I would hope that she is compensated somewhat. Hopefully, via insurance and a next of kin clause (however, unlikely) I do not think anyone should recieve any sort of monetary benefit from the accident. Especially, someone who is once removed.

   As for Higher/Lower pleasures…
   To me, its like listening to music. Of which I have a very personal, and defined musical taste. Now, a large portion of american society will go around touting their rock music of the variety. And the best songs. And my honest, and personal experience with a lot of those “best songs in history” I find to be empty to me. But then again, I love my Funk . Soul . R&B . and Hip Hop (Of which, I still prefer the heavy Jazz/funk/soul influences) I’m probably one of the few people out here who loves the sound more than the lyrical meaning too.

   And C’mon people. Fear Factor! Thats the only one where you possibley could experience something that would help further yourself by knowledge of yourself. (And thus you wouldn’t have to be a couch potatoe, or completely knowledgable about everything in the shakespearean era, which btw, an awesome life skill to have) Wouldn’t pushing yourself, in the end be the most valuable and therefore highest experience between the three?

   But then again, I do know at first whim, I’d still choose the Simpsons.
4. Jason says:

   October 14, 2009 at 5:28 am

   Oh, and if I remember correctly about the Pinto’s Cost-Benefit:
   EIther way they were still making huge profit at the time.

   Heh. Catchpa: “murdock Detroit”
5. jaehwan says:

   October 14, 2009 at 11:56 pm

   It’s funny how we’re talking about prices for life, and then the whole Male Pageant thing came up. Is the money that one has reflective of one’s contribution to society? After all, if you’re self made, it implies that you’re selling something that society needs. This could go back to the first Justice episode where they ate the boy. How do we measure contribution? It’s harder than it seems…
6. anna123 says:

   October 17, 2009 at 4:12 am

   “What I find appalling is when a corporation, a non-natural person decides the value of a natrual person’s life.”

   I think society already judges the value of human life in this manner, just watching the news you can see the power differences that shape the “value” placed upon human life in different places around the world. On peoples “real” value, some of the most influential people in human history have been labelled as having no value by mainstream , then went on to achieve great things in later life, so i think its a gray area.

   My favourite is Genghis Khan, he was nothing, spurned by all, no money, no job, broken family, destitute, even a slave at one time, yet through his own two hands, he later rose to become a man that united a nation, conquered civilisations and ruled almost half of the world, gloriously wealthy beyond what dreams are made of!

   For pleasure, i think that balance is quite good, and most people choose a balance between high and low anyway, regardless of how it is defined….

   lol, this is a HUGE GENERALISATION, (but comes from personal experience) but i think that Asian guy sounds like a fob and that might explain his position. Most “Fobs” didnt grow up in the west, they were socialised and raised in an environment where they are a majority, then when they come to a white country they still carry that privileged mindset with them, so they usually side with the established mainstream. Theres nothing wrong with being a fob, but in my humanly limited experience, most fobs are not very aware when it comes to identity politics in terms of “Western/white” generalisations. Again, I’m just generalising, maybe there are fobs who are different, but i just havent met any of them. I can tell from his accent (“ROC/taiwanese maybe?, pretty sure he aint no mainlander/hk/or Sthkorean/Japanese/Vietnamese…. ) that he was raised(from birth) not in the U.S, and just the fact that he speaks in that position really says something of his experience, ….i wonder if his ever been discriminated for being “Asian” or hit a bamboo ceiling before, it certaintly doesnt sound like it. He sounds privileged and his position sounds like that too. Also the way he spoke, he doesnt have a clue, he just wanted to stand up and be counted, but i felt he embarrased himself, and all around he just seems ignorant…..