Why do we value human life?

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by Sculptor1 »

HJCarden wrote: November 24th, 2020, 12:26 am Not an original topic, I know theres lots of work out there about this already, but interested in hearing some new thoughts about this.

I believe that very broadly, we can say that human life has value purely on its own, or if we value human life because we have a natural instinct for self preservation.
Yes it is true that certain innate behaviours tend to favour ways of living that preserve life. Whilst this would tend to provide an urge to value your own life, you might have to go further to explain why there can be a more general valuing of some "other" human lives.

This has always interested me, because it seems that the overwhelming amount of substantive and logical evidence pushes us towards believing that our value is an illusion created by survival instincts, but I feel an irresistible pull to believe that human life has its own innate value.
??? WHAT?
A value requires a valuer, and an evaluation. Unless you want to throw "God" into the picture, all you are doing is imposing an anthropogenic system on an unwitting universe.
There is no International Bank of human value. Human value is by no means universal. It is very partial, very biased, and very particular. As a currency, beware, you cannot achive value for it the world over. There are several places on earth where yout life is worth less than nothing. In fact you could be worth more dead than alive.
I'd love to know what sort of mentality, or ideology makes people think this way!!
We seem plagued with them on the Forum: those who keep pushing for objective morality, as if that were a thing.
What psychological problem generates these sorts of fallacies, I wonder?

My loose collection of arguments for believing this intuition is as follows

Possibility of God/Creator: If there is a God (fairly, because I do believe in God, this argument is biased) I think it follows in most conceptions and is logical to me that human life has innate value.

Human moral reasoning: This argument I believe is only persuasive if one DOES NOT believe in God/creator. As I see it
-Humans are the highest reasoning beings that exist (outside of the not-believed in God)
-Therefore, we are masters of creation, the highest type of being (this assumes a very high value of reason)
-Highest type of reason gives us the highest moral reasoning

Therefore,
-Humans are the highest morally reasoning beings

Being the highest morally reasoning beings sounds like its pretty innately valuable.

Several holes in this argument, assumption of high value of morality and reason
also why should anyone other than humans give a damn about all of this morality stuff, doesnt seem to bother rocks if theres war crimes

Interested to hear anyone's thoughts and questions
You "intuition" is nothing more than wishing on smoke, thinking its a cigar.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by Sculptor1 »

Terrapin Station wrote: November 24th, 2020, 10:57 am People value things, including human life, because the thing, or something that follows from the thing, puts their brain in a state where there are increased endorphins and/or oxytocin and/or serotonin and/or dopamine. Why our brains respond that way to various things is probably often enough just an accident of evolution. They can respond that way merely to structures of form where that's pretty abstract, after all--as in aesthetic responses. And obviously not everyone's brain responds the same way to the same things. So different people value different things.

But yeah, I'm sure that valuing one's own species tends to be the case because there was an evolutionary advantage to that.
That's a cross between a naturalistic fallacy and a confusion of a moral and cultural norm masquerading as an evolutionary trait.
Selection works in the breach, not in the fore.
Millions of humans the world over place negative value on members of their own species.
- though you might have missed that in the cloistered realms of the comfy West, where negating other's lifes is usually directed at foreigners in foreign lands.
Many creatures need to protect enough of their own species at least to the point of reproduction in order for the species in question to survive, and humans are certainly one of those sorts of creatures. We're long down an evolutionary chain where individuals can not survive on their own, without some sort of protection/nurturing, to a reproduction stage.
User avatar
Jack D Ripper
Posts: 610
Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
Contact:

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by Jack D Ripper »

Sculptor1 wrote: November 28th, 2020, 3:33 pm...

This has always interested me, because it seems that the overwhelming amount of substantive and logical evidence pushes us towards believing that our value is an illusion created by survival instincts, but I feel an irresistible pull to believe that human life has its own innate value.
??? WHAT?
A value requires a valuer, and an evaluation. Unless you want to throw "God" into the picture, all you are doing is imposing an anthropogenic system on an unwitting universe.
There is no International Bank of human value. Human value is by no means universal. It is very partial, very biased, and very particular. As a currency, beware, you cannot achive value for it the world over. There are several places on earth where yout life is worth less than nothing. In fact you could be worth more dead than alive.
I'd love to know what sort of mentality, or ideology makes people think this way!!
We seem plagued with them on the Forum: those who keep pushing for objective morality, as if that were a thing.
What psychological problem generates these sorts of fallacies, I wonder?
...

I suspect that a good amount of this is due to being raised to believe in objective morality. I, for example, was raised to believe something akin to Kant's ethical theory (though I was not told about Kant), and so, until I thought about it enough, I believed that was true. Most people don't think enough about what they are raised to believe, and basically just believe what they are raised to believe for their entire lives. This is why most people in Saudi Arabia are Muslims, and most people in the United States are Christians. It is not something arrived at from reason, for if it were, there would not be that difference in outcome. It is just that most people continue to believe what they were raised to believe and never properly evaluate those beliefs.

Also, having strong emotions tends to cloud people's judgement. Ethics often involves matters that people feel very strongly about. And it feels to many like there must be something real about it when one's emotions are intense, something beyond the fact that one has strong feelings.

Additionally, there is a great deal of agreement with other people on many ethical matters. Pretty much every society has rules regarding murder and theft, for example, so there is a kind of universality to ethical matters, which, again, can make it seem like it is something objective. In other words, people confuse what is intersubjective with what is objective.

And for god believers, there is often a contradictory view of things, that the value comes from god, and yet they typically judge god to be good, imagining that that is something other than god valuing god. Really, many are exactly like Euthyphro in the dialog by Plato of that name.


Also, it is common for people to anthropomorphize the world. Primitive people imagine spirits inhabiting everything. This is also the source of the teleological nonsense about how the world works. For a very brief discussion of that idea (which is not there discussing morals; just the human tendency to think teleologically):

https://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleya ... logy.shtml

In other words, people naturally anthropomorphize the world and think teleologically about things. The idea of an objective morality fits with this, that the universe values things.


However, I agree with you that for there to be value, there must be a valuer. Your problem is that you expect other people to be reasonable. They are not. You are old enough that you should know that by now, and be more surprised when they don't seem irrational than when they do.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence." - David Hume
HJCarden
Posts: 137
Joined: November 18th, 2020, 12:22 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by HJCarden »

Sculptor1 wrote: November 28th, 2020, 3:33 pm
HJCarden wrote: November 24th, 2020, 12:26 am Not an original topic, I know theres lots of work out there about this already, but interested in hearing some new thoughts about this.

I believe that very broadly, we can say that human life has value purely on its own, or if we value human life because we have a natural instinct for self preservation.
Yes it is true that certain innate behaviours tend to favour ways of living that preserve life. Whilst this would tend to provide an urge to value your own life, you might have to go further to explain why there can be a more general valuing of some "other" human lives.

This has always interested me, because it seems that the overwhelming amount of substantive and logical evidence pushes us towards believing that our value is an illusion created by survival instincts, but I feel an irresistible pull to believe that human life has its own innate value.
??? WHAT?
A value requires a valuer, and an evaluation. Unless you want to throw "God" into the picture, all you are doing is imposing an anthropogenic system on an unwitting universe.
There is no International Bank of human value. Human value is by no means universal. It is very partial, very biased, and very particular. As a currency, beware, you cannot achive value for it the world over. There are several places on earth where yout life is worth less than nothing. In fact you could be worth more dead than alive.
I'd love to know what sort of mentality, or ideology makes people think this way!!
We seem plagued with them on the Forum: those who keep pushing for objective morality, as if that were a thing.
What psychological problem generates these sorts of fallacies, I wonder?
HJCarden
Posts: 137
Joined: November 18th, 2020, 12:22 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by HJCarden »

HJCarden wrote: November 28th, 2020, 5:10 pm
Sculptor1 wrote: November 28th, 2020, 3:33 pm
Yes it is true that certain innate behaviours tend to favour ways of living that preserve life. Whilst this would tend to provide an urge to value your own life, you might have to go further to explain why there can be a more general valuing of some "other" human lives.

??? WHAT?
A value requires a valuer, and an evaluation. Unless you want to throw "God" into the picture, all you are doing is imposing an anthropogenic system on an unwitting universe.
There is no International Bank of human value. Human value is by no means universal. It is very partial, very biased, and very particular. As a currency, beware, you cannot achive value for it the world over. There are several places on earth where yout life is worth less than nothing. In fact you could be worth more dead than alive.
I'd love to know what sort of mentality, or ideology makes people think this way!!
We seem plagued with them on the Forum: those who keep pushing for objective morality, as if that were a thing.
What psychological problem generates these sorts of fallacies, I wonder?
Flubbed previewing my response instead of saving it, my bad.

In response to your statements:

If you truly believe that it is some sort of mental illness that causes me to believe in the idea of objective morality, then we cannot have any productive conversation on this matter.

However, if you are willing to listen to my hypothesis, then it is as follows.
My reasoning for there being objective morality mimics the my reasoning for the valuation of human life.

P1. We have used reasoning to come to conclusions that we willingly refer to as facts.
P2. We have used reasoning to decide in moral situations, and we have made decisions on moral matters.

C1. We can reasonably refer to these moral decisions as moral facts after they have been given sufficient scrutiny.

From here, the impetus is on me to prove that these moral facts that we refer to are in fact objective truths about morality.
My argument mostly rests on the idea that we have made moral progress as a human species. If you disagree with me about this, then you will find my argument uncompelling.

P3. Something that has progressed can be perfected.
P4. Human morality has progressed over our existence.

C2. Human morality can be perfected.

P5. When searching for objectivity, an expert is a good source to consult
P6. As far as we can see, we are the best sources to consult about morality.
P7. Human morality can be perfected.

C3. Humans can be a source to find objective morality.

This is the broad strokes of my argument, and as I mentioned it relies upon the idea that humans have progressed morally.
HJCarden
Posts: 137
Joined: November 18th, 2020, 12:22 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by HJCarden »

Jack D Ripper wrote: November 28th, 2020, 4:35 pm
Additionally, there is a great deal of agreement with other people on many ethical matters. Pretty much every society has rules regarding murder and theft, for example, so there is a kind of universality to ethical matters, which, again, can make it seem like it is something objective. In other words, people confuse what is intersubjective with what is objective.
If "intersubjectivity" is your what you use to label broad agreement, then what would your standards for objectivity be? If you believe there are no knowable standards for objectivity or even any objectivity at all, then I know of no way to persuade you with my argumentation. However, if you do have standards for objectivity, then I would be interested in hearing them.
User avatar
Jack D Ripper
Posts: 610
Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
Contact:

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by Jack D Ripper »

HJCarden wrote: November 28th, 2020, 6:03 pm
Jack D Ripper wrote: November 28th, 2020, 4:35 pm
Additionally, there is a great deal of agreement with other people on many ethical matters. Pretty much every society has rules regarding murder and theft, for example, so there is a kind of universality to ethical matters, which, again, can make it seem like it is something objective. In other words, people confuse what is intersubjective with what is objective.
If "intersubjectivity" is your what you use to label broad agreement, then what would your standards for objectivity be? If you believe there are no knowable standards for objectivity or even any objectivity at all, then I know of no way to persuade you with my argumentation. However, if you do have standards for objectivity, then I would be interested in hearing them.

It is not simply a matter of what I personally mean by "objective".

Oxford wrote:objective

ADJECTIVE

1 (of a person or their judgement) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
Contrasted with subjective

1.1 Not dependent on the mind for existence; actual.
https://www.lexico.com/definition/objective


Subjective agreement with others is still subjective.

To give a concrete example, imagine that 10 people all agree that chocolate is better than vanilla. Does that mean that chocolate is objectively better than vanilla?

Or, to make this point more clear, if 10 people all agree that the world is flat, would that mean that, objectively, the world is flat?

Intersubjectivity is still subjective, and not objective.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence." - David Hume
baker
Posts: 608
Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by baker »

Sculptor1 wrote: November 28th, 2020, 3:33 pmWe seem plagued with them on the Forum: those who keep pushing for objective morality, as if that were a thing.
What psychological problem generates these sorts of fallacies, I wonder?
One source I can think of: Naive realism. The belief that "reality is as I see it" (of course, for a naive realist "reality is as I see it" is not a coherent statement, a naive realist has no sense of personal perspective or that perception is an active process).

But for the most part, this is not a "psychological problem", but an evolutionarily advantageous trait. Assuming, for all practical intents and purposes, that one is the arbiter of reality (again, not something that would be a coherent concept to a naive realist) is extremely powerful, it's the foundation of sanity for possibly the majority of human population. In order to be sane, one has to believe that one "knows how things really are". This includes issues of morality.


The other source of the belief in objective morality is a belief in the social contract, in social order, and dependence on it. How are you going to have a meaningful social life and cooperation, making your livelihood possible, unless you operate on the assumption that there is a one "how things really should be" and that all members of your community (or even all humans) are bound to it and by it.
baker
Posts: 608
Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by baker »

HJCarden wrote: November 24th, 2020, 12:26 amI believe that very broadly, we can say that human life has value purely on its own, or if we value human life because we have a natural instinct for self preservation.
I don't have the impression that humans generally value human life.

For example, in developed countries, the abortion rate is about 50%; meaning that on any given day, about a half of the prospective human population in those countries is killed off. If human life would truly be deemed so valuable by humans, then why are they so reckless with its production and destruction?
but I feel an irresistible pull to believe that human life has its own innate value.
The belief that human life has its own innate value is indispensable for a civilized life in community with other humans.
Whether that belief is true or not is another matter. But it does serve an important function.
Being the highest morally reasoning beings sounds like its pretty innately valuable.
If something has innate value, then no reasons are needed to back it up.
baker
Posts: 608
Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by baker »

Jack D Ripper wrote: November 26th, 2020, 7:09 pmMany who believe the story when told in an ancient book, written by primitive and barbarous people, would not believe the exact same story if told today. This means they are inconsistent in how they reason regarding religious stories.
But that's the whole point. The religious narrative is supposed to have special status.


Besides, as far as specifically the virgin birth goes: it's clearly stated in Christian narratives that Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit, not by a man. Which makes her pregnancy unique and unlike ordinary human pregnancies, incomparable to them.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14997
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by Sy Borg »

baker wrote: November 29th, 2020, 12:13 pm
HJCarden wrote: November 24th, 2020, 12:26 amI believe that very broadly, we can say that human life has value purely on its own, or if we value human life because we have a natural instinct for self preservation.
I don't have the impression that humans generally value human life.

For example, in developed countries, the abortion rate is about 50%; meaning that on any given day, about a half of the prospective human population in those countries is killed off. If human life would truly be deemed so valuable by humans, then why are they so reckless with its production and destruction?
Maybe humans don't value anything much? After all, we value human life infinitely more than animal and plant lives - which isn't saying much because most people apply zero value to non-human lives. To them, a hundred billion animal lives does not compare with even a single, primal human embryo.

Then again, to a crow, a nest of crow chicks is worth more than all eight billion humans.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by Sculptor1 »

HJCarden wrote: November 28th, 2020, 5:26 pm
HJCarden wrote: November 28th, 2020, 5:10 pm
Flubbed previewing my response instead of saving it, my bad.

In response to your statements:

If you truly believe that it is some sort of mental illness that causes me to believe in the idea of objective morality, then we cannot have any productive conversation on this matter.

However, if you are willing to listen to my hypothesis, then it is as follows.
My reasoning for there being objective morality mimics the my reasoning for the valuation of human life.

P1. We have used reasoning to come to conclusions that we willingly refer to as facts.
P2. We have used reasoning to decide in moral situations, and we have made decisions on moral matters.

C1. We can reasonably refer to these moral decisions as moral facts after they have been given sufficient scrutiny.

From here, the impetus is on me to prove that these moral facts that we refer to are in fact objective truths about morality.
My argument mostly rests on the idea that we have made moral progress as a human species. If you disagree with me about this, then you will find my argument uncompelling.

P3. Something that has progressed can be perfected.
P4. Human morality has progressed over our existence.

C2. Human morality can be perfected.

P5. When searching for objectivity, an expert is a good source to consult
P6. As far as we can see, we are the best sources to consult about morality.
P7. Human morality can be perfected.

C3. Humans can be a source to find objective morality.

This is the broad strokes of my argument, and as I mentioned it relies upon the idea that humans have progressed morally.
Moral are about values.
Human values are neither uniform nor impartial.
Values are subjecive.
Morality cannot be objective.
Empirically this is clearly demonstrated throughout history and across cultures.
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by Sculptor1 »

baker wrote: November 29th, 2020, 11:58 am
Sculptor1 wrote: November 28th, 2020, 3:33 pmWe seem plagued with them on the Forum: those who keep pushing for objective morality, as if that were a thing.
What psychological problem generates these sorts of fallacies, I wonder?
One source I can think of: Naive realism. The belief that "reality is as I see it" (of course, for a naive realist "reality is as I see it" is not a coherent statement, a naive realist has no sense of personal perspective or that perception is an active process).

But for the most part, this is not a "psychological problem", but an evolutionarily advantageous trait. Assuming, for all practical intents and purposes, that one is the arbiter of reality (again, not something that would be a coherent concept to a naive realist) is extremely powerful, it's the foundation of sanity for possibly the majority of human population. In order to be sane, one has to believe that one "knows how things really are". This includes issues of morality.


The other source of the belief in objective morality is a belief in the social contract, in social order, and dependence on it. How are you going to have a meaningful social life and cooperation, making your livelihood possible, unless you operate on the assumption that there is a one "how things really should be" and that all members of your community (or even all humans) are bound to it and by it.
I think parents tend to like to bring up their children in a safe and certain world.
Many people complete their entire lives cloistered in this childish naivete.
The church and education can contribute to this state of being.
My view is that such an approach to the world is dangerous, making us suspeptible to fakers and cheats.
It is the most extreme negligence of the educational system to fail to teach everyday skepticism. The norm is to teach what is is safe; to teach compliance; to teach reassurance.
It would make more sense to enable people to ask questions and challenge the norms.
User avatar
Jack D Ripper
Posts: 610
Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
Contact:

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by Jack D Ripper »

baker wrote: November 29th, 2020, 12:20 pm
Jack D Ripper wrote: November 26th, 2020, 7:09 pmMany who believe the story when told in an ancient book, written by primitive and barbarous people, would not believe the exact same story if told today. This means they are inconsistent in how they reason regarding religious stories.
But that's the whole point. The religious narrative is supposed to have special status.


Besides, as far as specifically the virgin birth goes: it's clearly stated in Christian narratives that Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit, not by a man. Which makes her pregnancy unique and unlike ordinary human pregnancies, incomparable to them.
If it did it before, then the Holy Spirit can impregnate women again. Or has god become impotent with age?

Rejecting the story off-hand in the modern era is essentially saying that god is no longer powerful and capable. He used to be able to do magic tricks, but he no longer has that power.

What you are stating seems to suggest that you think modern Christians think that god is dead.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence." - David Hume
baker
Posts: 608
Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am

Re: Why do we value human life?

Post by baker »

Jack D Ripper wrote: November 29th, 2020, 4:49 pmIf it did it before, then the Holy Spirit can impregnate women again. Or has god become impotent with age?
Rejecting the story off-hand in the modern era is essentially saying that god is no longer powerful and capable. He used to be able to do magic tricks, but he no longer has that power.
What you are stating seems to suggest that you think modern Christians think that god is dead.
Not at all. The standard narrative in Christianity (-ies) is that life on Earth is a unique, one-time event. There was one creation, one beginning, there is one life, only one planet on which there is life, and there is going to be one end, one judgment, and from then on, one eternal (!) heaven or one eternal (!) damnation. Hence only one true religion is necessary, and only one savior to atone for mankind's sins.
It would be sacrilege, heresy, to suggest that there could be more than one savior of mankind. Virgin conception and birth is unique and reserved for Jesus.

Thus the standard narrative in Christianity.
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021