“Value”is that which one acts to gain and/or keep. The concept of “Value” is not a primary; it presupposes an answer to the question; of value to whom and for what? It presupposes an entity capable of acting to achieve a goal in the face of an alternative. Where no alternative exists, no goals and no values are possible. ~ virtue of selfishness
It is only the concept of ‘Life’ that makes the concept of ‘Value’ possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil. ~ virtue of selfishness
Imagine a robot irremovable preprogrammed to explode after a 120 year lifespan, which is at the same time entirely indestructible by outside forces, has its own unlimited power supply and can move and act. Such an entity would not be able to have any values; it would have nothing to gain or lose; it would not regard anything as for or against it during its lifespan and no actions are possible to prevent its eventual demise; where no alternative exists, no goals and no values are possible.
Hence, a predestined-finite existence (unavoidable death ) by itself is not sufficient to require a science of ethics (according to objectivism).
But if the robot would have the option of creating another robot, but only entirely in its image, then robot could have hold a value, the value of its own basic form that can remain instantiated in another entity after its own existence would end.
Now Imagine a robot without a self destruct mechanism, which is not indestructible by outside forces, which runs on a battery that needs a regular recharge and has parts that wear out and need replacement now and then. It can stay in existence forever, provided it ensures its own maintenance and keeps save. Such an entity would be able to have values; it would have something to gain or lose; it would regard many things as for or against it and would take all kinds of actions to support and safeguard its existence; where an alternative exist, goals and values are possible.
Hence, a potential infinite, but conditional existence (conditional life) is sufficient to require a science of ethics.
It is the exploding robot, not the self maintaining robot which captures the essence of the indestructible randian robot, it is unavoidable death that is outside the real of ethics according to objectivism. It is conditional life which according to objectivism requires a science of ethics.
With regard to living entities; it is not the inevitability of eventual death that gives rise to ethics, it is the fact that it is possible, but not certain to stay alive until the inevitable death occurs.
On the physical level, the functions of all living organisms, from the simplest to the most complex- from the nutritive function in the single cell of an amoeba to the blood circulation in the body of a man-are actions generated by the organism itself and directed to a single goal; the maintenance of the organism’s life. ~ virtue of selfishness
This is not true, the maintenance of the organism’s life is not the only goal, it is a fact that organisms also pursuit reproduction. The pleasure pain mechanism induces the lower life forms to procreate. To them, quote; ‘the physical sensation of pleasure is a signal indicating that the organism is pursuing the right course of action’ .
Note that fundamentally the maintenance of an organisms life cannot on principle be in conflict with reproduction, in most lower life forms the offspring is not taken care of by the parents. In higher animals the parents take care of their young when they are in their infancy and dependent for their survival on their parents. So if the parent dies, so will the offspring, so reproduction and parenting do never fundamentally require sacrifies of the parents life.
It is only to entities with an inevitable finite existence that reproduction be a value, if it fails in producing offspring it distinctive features go out of existence when it dies; If it succeeds its distinctive features will be passed on. Reproduction is the cause of an entities life, it was enacted by another entity that enacted the antecedent causes that lead its life to the act of reproduction and it took care of the its offspring until it was capable of doing so itself, thereby passing on its own features. These features become both cause and consequence of reproduction; an entity possessing them will reproduce, passing on those features to a new entity which possesses them. Life is an end in itself in a wider sense than A life is an end in itself. Reproduction is required for A life to come into existence, selfish action is required for A life to stay in existence.
The simpler organisms, such as plants, can reproduce by means of their automatic physical functions. The higher organisms, such as animals and man, cannot; their needs are more complex and the range of their action is wider. (sentence structure borrowed from virtue of selfishness)
Man, the rational animal, capable of controlling its environment superlatively is born completely dependent and helpless. He depends for many year on his parents before he can eventually take successfully take control of its own life. Just like the exploding robot he’s life is inevitable finite and just like the self repairing robot, he has to take constant action to maintain it own life. He has an incentive to act to have a flourishing life and an incentive to procreate. Those are not in conflict; those that place procreation before own flourishing attempt to procreate by the means of lower life forms; they will not be able to take good care of their offspring, which in turn will flourish even less. If pride is the consequence of being worthy of living, then it is an indication of ones worthiness of romantic love. If love of the other is a response to the our values reflected in others than our love of a person of the other sex is a response to their worthiness of living, which indicates their worthiness of being a mate in a union that produces offspring.
