People DO Matter

[Gloomic]

I was originally going to respond to a vent thread that said nobody matters with this, but I decided to make my own thread because I felt as though responding with this was not the right time and place. Especially, since many of those vent threads under the suicide discussion sub-forum are not looking for a long discussion, but a way of releasing stress.

I will still answer some things that the original post mentioned that I was going to comment on, then move forward to why people matter to an extent.

I acknowledge the state of mind for many people on here and understand people have the view that nobody matters. We don't need to have the same perspective on things, but I'm willing to have a productive discussion.

Fake empathy was a term used for when strangers initiated pleasantries with them, specifically referencing American culture. Here is my response to that portion.

Empathy is defined as understanding and sharing the feelings of another. When people give you greetings of 'how was your day' and things of the like, it's an act of courtesy in American culture, not empathy. It's to be polite and engage in small talk. This is not universally liked by Americans, but it still stands as a commonality in the United States. General politeness shouldn't be attached to only personal interest.

My ideology is that everyone matters to an extent. Everyone plays a role in society in different ways. People matter because of their decisions and influences. When an argument is made that someone doesn't matter, it strips away the impact a person's decisions have by invalidating the person's existence. Someone experiencing something positive or negative, within themselves or by the hands of someone else, is invalidated of their experience because of this.
Victims lose their voice because they are seen as insignificant, and aggressors will not be held accountable due to percieved insignificance. The people who do acts of kindness, work hard, and contribute to the progession of society are also seen as not important to be discussed, taking away community.
Think of all the types of different people that exist and their social groups. Criminals, historical figures, parents, children, abuse victims, workers, homeless, people with disabilities, and so many more.
Saying that people don't matter invalidates consequences of people's choices, people's experiences, and autonomy.

Now, whether some people should exist or not is another statement that is not exactly the same as whether someone matters. People can have their subjective views on who deserves to live or die, or who they care about or not, and that's more acceptable than saying that none of it matters.

In our society, people have to matter to a certain extent for there to be a standard of respect to others and yourself.

 

[KarmaKat]

I can understand saying "people don't matter" at a grand, cosmic scale... I don't think the universe (as a whole) would change a single iota if humanity poofed out of existence tomorrow, not in any meaningful way.

but at a personal, human scale, people matter, both directly and indirectly, actions have long spanning consequences, however small.

I do think it is important to distinguish between "matter" in the sense of "I don't care about said thing" VS. "said thing has no effect on the world" – that things have effects on other things is undeniable, but wether one cares or not is ultimately subjective.

 

[PimpHand]

I have mixed opinions on this.

I believe we are incapable of having "instinctive" empathy towards everyone, because we used to live as hunter-gatherers in small communities of at most a dozen or maybe few hundred people. It took a long time for the first thousand-like cities to appear. Even if we had the biological capacity, time would be a great problem. My country has roughly 200M people. If I took 5 minutes to understand the life of everyone (a short time), I would need almost 2000 years!

So, we can't grasp the scale of modern society. But there's something called "cognitive empathy" the view that we can reach universal empathy by extending small empathy through logic and induction. For example, I feel pain, I don't like being punched, so I assume everyone doesn't like to being punched.

But I believe this attitude is inherently flawed, because we are applying an approach of induction based on limited evidence, the evidence of our own experiences and the experiences of people we know. That approach will be bounded by factors such as life experiences, family, culture, religion and even genetics. If I'm autistic, I will manage empathy way differently than people out of the spectrum.

I believe it is, thus, impossible to have an universal concept of empathy that will embrace all human beings. Some beings are contradictory, some beings have values that are fundamentally against ours, to the point that they will condemn something as advanced as a Declaration of Human Rights. They will claim to be oppressed and as soon as they are free they will start oppressing, and so on...
I still think we should exercise empathy. But not in a conventional way. Not in a way to embrace every single human being, but to embrace the human beings that respect us according to our own values that were examined by us. That's the reason I think people matter. Because at the end of the day, we are just animals that lived in harmony with nature. We don't need to be violent and disrespectful. We choose to be.

I am not a misanthrope in the sense of hating the biological human. I don't hate the human nature, I hate the current human condition, and I believe we can change it.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I feel that people's rights need to matter- no matter how they themselves feel about themselves. Otherwise, we'll be in even more of a mess than we already are. Some of our laws surely exist to try to protect those most vulnerable to exploitation.

That doesn't necessarily tie into empathy though. In fact- the laws laid down to try to protect the vulnerable are debatably there to try and stop those with little empathy doing whatever they like with everyone else.

I'd also say that multiple viewpoints can exist at the same time. I'm quite misanthropic. I think this world would be far better off without humans on it. As other members have discussed, I'm not convinced in terms of the universe- that we matter anymore than the dinosaurs or the dodo.

In fact- we have surely been a destructive force on this planet. We've managed to wipe out 100,000 to 260,000 species (according to Google.) I'd actually say we have been a blight on this planet.

That said- even if it were possible, I wouldn't want to be the one that annhialates our species. I'd prefer it to come about via chosen antinatilism. Plus- seeing as it most likely won't- in order to live in a society where the fewest sentient beings suffer- it's important that we respect the rights of all living beings. To acknowledge that everything matters- everything has the rights to not suffer terribly. Whether or not we naturally feel empathy for them.

As for empathy itself- I'm sure that it does exist. Even if it is ultimately self serving. Even if we only care about other beings in the hopes they will ultimately help us. It still exists for some people and it still leads them to act in kind, caring ways.

 

[Pluto]