Free to follow every thread. No paywall, no dead ends.
Value (ethics): the story on HearLore | HearLore
Value (ethics)
Imagine a world where every decision you make is guided by an invisible force you cannot see, touch, or measure, yet it dictates whether you lie to save a life or tell the truth and let someone suffer. This force is value, the fundamental metric of human ethics that determines the degree of importance we assign to actions, objects, and ways of living. Without this internal compass, society would lack the normative framework necessary to distinguish between right and wrong, turning human existence into a chaotic series of random impulses rather than intentional choices. Values are not merely abstract philosophical concepts; they are the proscriptive and prescriptive beliefs that form the bedrock of ethical behavior, influencing everything from the way a parent raises a child to how a nation conducts its foreign policy. They serve as the criteria by which we judge the goodness of an action, the beauty of a landscape, or the dignity of a person, creating a hierarchy of importance that allows us to navigate the complexities of existence.
The Battle of Absolutes
The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein once declared that ethical value judgments are nonsense, arguing that while we can speak endlessly about the meaning of life, these statements are merely expressions of the mind and never facts derived from the heart or will. This pessimistic view sparked a centuries-long debate regarding whether values are absolute truths existing independently of human perception, or if they are relative constructs that shift between cultures and individuals. On one side stand the absolutists who believe in noumenal values that are philosophically independent of whether they are known or apprehended, while on the other side are the relativists who argue that values differ between people and on a larger scale between people of different cultures. This tension creates a philosophical battlefield where some argue that an elucidation of absolute values will never happen, while others insist that certain moral truths exist regardless of individual or cultural views. The struggle to define the nature of value is not just an academic exercise; it determines whether we can ever truly agree on what constitutes a good life or if we are destined to remain in a state of perpetual moral disagreement.
The Sacred Trade-Off
In the heat of the ISIS front lines in Iraq, combatants and ordinary citizens in Western Europe were found to be willing to make the most costly sacrifices imaginable, including the willingness to fight and die, and even to forsake close kin and comrades for the sake of their values. These are known as protected values, or sacred values, which an individual is unwilling to trade off no matter what the benefits of doing so may be. Unlike utilitarian calculations that seek to maximize utility across individuals, protected values act as a barrier to businesslike negotiations, often hindering peace in protracted conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. When two competing protected values collide, such as the decision to kill a person to defend your family, the result is a tragic trade-off that defies rational economic logic. Research by Scott Atran and Ángel Gómez suggests that commitment to these sacred values motivates the most devoted actors to ignore the consequences of their actions, prioritizing their participation in transactions over the outcomes themselves. This phenomenon reveals that human morality is not always a matter of calculation, but sometimes a rigid adherence to principles that cannot be quantified or bargained away.
Value is the fundamental metric of human ethics that determines the degree of importance we assign to actions, objects, and ways of living. It serves as the criteria by which we judge the goodness of an action, the beauty of a landscape, or the dignity of a person. Without this internal compass, society would lack the normative framework necessary to distinguish between right and wrong.
Who is Ludwig Wittgenstein and what did he say about ethical value judgments?
The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein once declared that ethical value judgments are nonsense, arguing that statements about the meaning of life are merely expressions of the mind and never facts derived from the heart or will. This pessimistic view sparked a centuries-long debate regarding whether values are absolute truths existing independently of human perception or if they are relative constructs that shift between cultures and individuals.
What are protected values and how do they affect conflicts?
Protected values, also known as sacred values, are values an individual is unwilling to trade off no matter what the benefits of doing so may be. These values act as a barrier to businesslike negotiations and often hinder peace in protracted conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when two competing protected values collide.
How does the Inglehart-Welzel cultural map of the world position countries?
The Inglehart-Welzel cultural map of the world positions countries based on their transition from traditional to secular-rational values and from survival to self-expression values. This map shows how cultures evolve from a religious understanding of the world to a dominance of science and bureaucracy, and how societies shift from industrial survival to post-industrial self-expression.
What are the differences in child-rearing practices among Italian, Swedish, and American parents?
Italian parents value social and emotional abilities and having an even temperament, while Swedish parents prioritize security and happiness. American parents are unusual for strongly valuing intellectual ability, especially in a narrow book learning sense, whereas the Kipsigis people of Kenya value children who employ their intelligence in a responsible and helpful way.
What are the ten universal values identified by S. H. Schwartz?
S. H. Schwartz groups values in terms of growth versus protection and personal versus social focus, placing ten universal values within this framework including self-direction, stimulation, hedonism, achievement, power, security, conformity, tradition, humility, benevolence, and universalism. Research has shown that the order of Schwartz's traits is substantially stable amongst adults over time.
The Inglehart-Welzel cultural map of the world reveals a two-dimensional landscape where countries are positioned based on their transition from traditional to secular-rational values and from survival to self-expression values. This map shows how cultures evolve from a religious understanding of the world to a dominance of science and bureaucracy, and how societies shift from industrial survival to post-industrial self-expression. Within this framework, tight cultures that have faced a history of threats such as natural disasters, high population density, or vulnerability to infectious diseases are more restrictive and have stricter disciplinary measures for norm violations. In contrast, loose cultures with weaker social norms and a higher tolerance for deviant behavior emerge in safer and more peaceful environments. The regality theory of evolutionary psychology supports these findings, suggesting that war and collective dangers lead to hierarchical, authoritarian, and warlike cultures, while safe environments foster egalitarian and tolerant ones. This global mapping demonstrates that values are not static but are dynamic responses to the environmental and historical pressures that shape human societies.
The Parent's Dilemma
Parents in a hunter-gatherer society begin teaching their babies to use sharp tools, including knives, before their first birthdays, prioritizing practical survival skills over all other considerations. This stands in stark contrast to Italian parents who value social and emotional abilities and having an even temperament, or Swedish parents who prioritize security and happiness. American parents are unusual for strongly valuing intellectual ability, especially in a narrow book learning sense, while the Kipsigis people of Kenya value children who employ their intelligence in a responsible and helpful way, which they call ng'om. The Luos of Kenya value education and pride which they call nyadhi, and Dutch parents value independence, long attention spans, and predictable schedules. These differences in child-rearing practices reflect the deep-seated cultural values that shape the next generation, showing how the transmission of values is a critical process that varies wildly across the globe. The way a society raises its children determines the future trajectory of its values, creating a cycle where the past shapes the present and the present shapes the future.
The Economics of Ethics
Philosophical value is distinguished from economic value, as it is independent from some other desired condition or commodity, yet economic value may be regarded as a result of philosophical value. In the subjective theory of value, the personal philosophical value a person puts in possessing something is reflected in what economic value this person puts on it, creating a limit where a person considers to purchase something. This point is reached when the personal philosophical value of possessing something exceeds the personal philosophical value of what is given up in exchange for it, such as money. The distinction between intrinsic and instrumental value further complicates this relationship, as an instrumental value is worth having as a means towards getting something else that is good, while an intrinsically valuable thing is worth for itself. An object may be both a mean and end-in-itself, such as understanding science, which is both worthwhile in and of itself and as a means of achieving other goods. This interplay between the two types of value creates a complex system where the sum of instrumental and intrinsic value is used when putting that object in value systems, which is a set of consistent values and measures.
The Clash of Systems
When a group member expresses a value that seriously conflicts with the group's norms, the group's authority may carry out various ways of encouraging conformity or stigmatizing the non-conforming behavior of that member, sometimes resulting in imprisonment. This conflict arises because values are more global and intellectual than norms, which provide rules for behavior in specific situations, while values identify what should be judged as good or evil. A society may require contributions from its members in order for them to benefit from the services provided by the society, and the failure of individuals to make such required contributions could be considered a reason to deny those benefits to them. The difference between an idealized value system that lacks exceptions and a realized value system that contains exceptions to resolve contradictions in practical circumstances is evident when people state that they hold one value system yet in practice deviate from it. This discrepancy highlights the tension between the abstract ideals we hold and the messy reality of daily life, where exceptions must be made to resolve contradictions between values.
The Universal Search
S. H. Schwartz, along with a number of psychology colleagues, has carried out empirical research investigating whether there are universal values, and what those values are, defining values as conceptions of the desirable that influence the way people select action and evaluate events. He hypothesized that universal values would relate to three different types of human need: biological needs, social co-ordination needs, and needs related to the welfare and survival of groups. His model groups values in terms of growth versus protection, and personal versus social focus, placing ten universal values within this framework, including self-direction, stimulation, hedonism, achievement, power, security, conformity, tradition, humility, benevolence, and universalism. Research has shown that the order of Schwartz's traits is substantially stable amongst adults over time, and that migrants' values change when they move to a new country, but the order of preferences is still quite stable. This search for universal values suggests that despite the vast differences in culture and individual experience, there may be a common thread that binds humanity together, a set of core values that transcend borders and time.