Multiperspectivism and contradiction

[Reciprocality]

This is not meant to be a philosophy that everything particular is a representation of, it is more an inquiry on the capacity for seeming contradictions within a mind.

I have at least for a decade had intuitions of a problem I never really sorted out, and will put it out here to see if someone has either 1: a solution to it, 2: synthesis of it into something bigger or 3: a rebuttal of it's meaning.

Here goes: The value of a person x within a given system in general increases and decreases the value of all others y within that system were person x to die.

To make it concrete let us consider a family, and more so your family (I assume most people here do have that). Will the death of your mother make the value you find in or projects on your father decrease or increase?  Value as in how much you love them or how much they mean to you. For me it goes both ways, I refuse to say why I believe that for the benefit of open discourse.

Similar though certainly different: Will the death of a child in a war make the value of each of the other children subject to the same war lesser or bigger? Is the value of each of the ten people living on earth in a scenario A equal to each of the ten billion living on it in scenario B? 

I do not ask these questions in the hope for any completeness in their answers, that would be buffoonery both in trial and error. Though I ask them to better know how I can make them sensible at all if I can, and from the intuition that any answer however low in resolution make me better in judging how to act.

You can either project the meaning these questions have onto the world willingly, or you can cancel these projections dogmatically.

I am happy for any kind of response.

[Yarco]

1 hour ago, Reciprocality said:

The value of a person x within a given system in general increases and decreases the value of all others y within that system were person x to die.

Right now this statement seems way too vague to me. If you say it could either increase or decrease depending on the scenario, then this is basically an unfalsifiable claim, except in circumstances where it has no effect at all. I think we can all agree that someone dying will have some effect, either positive or negative, unless it's literally some hermit living in the woods who has no contact with anyone.

1 hour ago, Reciprocality said:

Will the death of your mother make the value you find in or projects on your father decrease or increase?  Value as in how much you love them or how much they mean to you. For me it goes both ways, I refuse to say why I believe that for the benefit of open discourse.

The way this part I've bolded is worded is very confusing, but I'll try to interpret it the best I can.

Will the death of my mother make me appreciate my father more? Maybe in the short-term. When I lose one parent, the realization that I can lose the other one might make me want to spend more time with them for a while. But I imagine this will quickly go back to a similar baseline level as before.

If I don't have a good relationship with my father, I don't think that the death of my mother will suddenly make me want to spend more time with him.

I don't understand how it could go both ways for you simultaneously. If your mother died, you'd both care about your father more and less simultaneously? Or am I misunderstanding?

1 hour ago, Reciprocality said:

Will the death of a child in a war make the value of each of the other children subject to the same war lesser or bigger?

Is the value of each of the ten people living on earth in a scenario A equal to each of the ten billion living on it in scenario B? 

From a parent's perspective, I think the same applies to the previous example. If you see other kids dying in war, it will temporarily make you appreciate your alive kid more and take them less for granted. But over time, people revert back to taking everything for granted.

For a sibling, the death of a brother or sister increases their value in some ways. They now get the undivided attention of their parents, instead of having to split it with a sibling. When their parents die, they will inherit all of their wealth instead of splitting it with a sibling.

On a national scale, each person eliminated increases the value of remaining citizens. Less people to share retirement funds, social security, and other benefits with. On the other hand, less tax revenue. And national debt will be spread between less citizens, so technically each citizen owes more on paper (not that I think national debt will ever be reduced or collected.)

If all elderly and disabled people who no longer contribute to society were killed, it would increase the value of all remaining people in the society, at least from a financial perspective. Not advocating for it or saying it would be ethical at all, purely theoretical.