The worth of a person and how can we comprehend such an abstract notion, has been a long pondered upon subject.
In times past, a person's worth may have been based upon the moral values one possesed, like how kind were they to their fellow people, how much kindness did they show to the genreal public or how trusted were they by their peers.
However times have changed, and with it has changed how we as a society estimate a person's worth. These days all the attention seems to have been shifted to the materialistic possessions one gathers, rather than moral capacity one holds. One's worth is now connected to how high he/she is in the social ladder, the annual income of an individual, how big of a property do they own, etcetra.
One can argue that moral values no longer hold importance over physical possions and currency. However one can also argue that people of the past who were revered as kings and lords, gained their very status because of their material wealth itself, and not because of the values they held.
I beileve human behavour and society as a whole, is rarely black and white. There is always a hint of grey; it is true that a person's worth, on a surface level, is all too easy to be attributed to how much their annual salaray is or how expensive is the car they drive. But it does not invalidate the fact that, beyond that surface level evaluation, an immoral person will never be respected or loved by their own. Yes, they still may earn a huge paycheck, but physical possesions cannot the match the warmth and liveliness of human affection. To conclude, I
do disagree with the statment, however not entirely. As today a person's value is connected to their net worth, but their place in the society is not a result of just that.
The
worth
of a person and how can we comprehend such an abstract notion, has been a long pondered upon subject.
In times past, a
person's
worth
may have
been based
upon the moral values one
possesed
, like how kind were they to their fellow
people
, how much kindness did they
show
to the
genreal
public or how trusted were they
by
their peers.
However
times have
changed
, and with it has
changed
how we as a society estimate a
person's
worth
. These days all the attention seems to have
been shifted
to the materialistic possessions one gathers,
rather
than moral capacity one holds. One's
worth
is
now
connected to how high he/she is in the social ladder, the annual income of an individual, how
big
of a property do they
own
,
etcetra
.
One can argue that moral values no longer hold importance over physical
possions
and currency.
However
one can
also
argue that
people
of the past who
were revered
as kings and lords, gained their
very
status
because
of their material wealth itself, and not
because
of the values they held.
I
beileve
human
behavour
and society as a whole, is rarely black and white. There is always a hint of
grey
; it is true that a
person's
worth
, on a surface level, is all too easy to
be attributed
to how much their annual
salaray
is or how expensive is the car they drive.
But
it does not invalidate the fact that, beyond that surface level evaluation, an immoral person will never
be respected
or
loved
by their
own
. Yes, they
still
may earn a huge paycheck,
but
physical
possesions
cannot the match the warmth and liveliness of human affection.
To conclude
,
I
do
disagree with the
statment
,
however
not
entirely
. As
today
a
person's
value
is connected
to their net
worth
,
but
their place in the society is not a result of
just
that.
Funny
Love
Wow
Angry
Sad
Show Comments