>>1468>Unsubstantiated appeal to emotion and subjective opinions, also assuming you and I share any point of view.
I know all of this is subjective. What value is, is subjective. The whole point of this thread was to ask for other people's opinions on something. Also, it seems reasonable for me to assume that you value artists you like more than those you don't. It's like me assuming you don't want to be stabbed through the chest. It's a pretty universal trait.>Just like your unsubstantiated response.
Nothing in this thread is substantiated. That point was irrelevant because a individual person's worth shouldn't be based on their number of loved ones in my opinion. One individual to another individual without taking anything else into account. >Again, meaningless appeal to subjective opinions and taste. What you 'believe' is irrelevant.
What is relevant then? Do you really think I mean to mathematically calculate the worth of a person?>Not to the homeless drug addict. 'Objectively' nothing is objective as long as a thinking subject thinks it up.
To society a scientist is worth much more. Most people would probably agree that a homeless drug addict isn't as important as a scientist, or at least they would think that to them self. I guess instead of, "objective", I should have said to most people. You haven't responded to some of my points. I feel like you're choosing to not engage in my ideas because you disliked them for the first moment.