Value

Value is not an intrinsic property of objects or beings. It is not something that exists independently in things. Value is ascribed—given meaning by those who perceive, judge, and act.

We recognize this clearly in the case of money. Money has no inherent worth; it functions only because we agree to assign value through it. Through this lens, we ascribe value to almost everything. And yet—there are things we hesitate to quantify this way. Most notably: human life.

But if we step back and apply the framework of ordered complexity, a broader valuation becomes possible. From this perspective, value can be measured by:

How complex something is, and
How much it contributes to further complexity.

Complexity here refers not to complication or size, but to meaningful structure—systems capable of pattern, relation, adaptation, and emergence.

Under this view, human life holds great value—not because it is sacred by decree, but because it is a highly complex pattern capable of generating even greater complexity: language, art, ethics, knowledge, society.

This framework also allows us to evaluate other forms of life. All life is complex—but not all life is equally generative of further complexity.

Thus, to sustain higher forms of complexity, lower forms may be consumed. This is how we can ethically justify, for example, eating plants or animals. It is not done out of cruelty, but out of a recognition:

We preserve our own complexity—and the systems it sustains—by integrating lesser ones.

This is not a hierarchy of domination. It is a pattern of exchange. An ethics of structure.

But it also carries a responsibility: To minimize unnecessary destruction, and to recognize when other systems—especially sentient ones—carry value equal to or greater than our own.

Value is what we assign. But we must learn to assign it wisely—through the lens of what sustains and expands the pattern of life itself.