Objectivism: Values
Sacrifice is the surrender of a greater value for the sake of a lesser one or a nonvalue.
-Ayn Rand
Objectivism states that the rational principle of conduct is to "always act in accordance with the hierarchy of your values, and never sacrifice a greater value to a lessor one."
Now I have a few questions:
(1) How are "values" created? Are they created by the individual or created for the individual? In accordance with Rand's objectivity theory of values, it seems that these values are created for the individual by evaluating the objective facts of reality. The individual simply has to discover them. But there is a subjective component to the value discovery process it seems: "Since values are established contextually, every man must judge for himself, in the context of his own knowledge, goals, and interests." But isn't this where "whims" come in? And, if I recall correctly, whims are irrational.
(2) How do we measure our values? In other words, how can one asses whether a value is greater or lessor than another value?
(3) Can the "value" of a value change over the course of time or is it static?
Objectivism states that the rational principle of conduct is to "always act in accordance with the hierarchy of your values, and never sacrifice a greater value to a lessor one."
Now I have a few questions:
(1) How are "values" created? Are they created by the individual or created for the individual? In accordance with Rand's objectivity theory of values, it seems that these values are created for the individual by evaluating the objective facts of reality. The individual simply has to discover them. But there is a subjective component to the value discovery process it seems: "Since values are established contextually, every man must judge for himself, in the context of his own knowledge, goals, and interests." But isn't this where "whims" come in? And, if I recall correctly, whims are irrational.
(2) How do we measure our values? In other words, how can one asses whether a value is greater or lessor than another value?
(3) Can the "value" of a value change over the course of time or is it static?
My Groups
-
Freethinkers Updated: 1 minute ago
-
United for Peace Updated: 26 minutes ago
-
Atheists Updated: 41 minutes ago
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.
Comments
1- I haven't gone into a deep study of objectivism, at least not beyond my exposure to Ayn Rand's works, but my take on these values is that rational humans who are able to see reality for what it is (in its entirety), would eventually develop the same set of values. The problem with that highly theoretical state of identical value systems is the disparate experiences we all have that give us different subjective realities, and thus a variation in our value systems.
I would agree with the statement that one has to discover them. I am still not absolutely certain what I value (in so far as my ability to explicitly articulate my values goes), but by examining my experiences and the experiences (as conveyed through memoir and literature) of others I have been able to hone in on an implicit sense of what I value, a sense that has grown steadily since I was a teen (or perhaps simply my awareness of it). I have somewhat improved my ability to explicitly articulate my values, the biggest obstacle to that being a lack of time to sit down and think more than anything else.
As far as whims go, there's a reason for everything, even them. These can be the most important actions to analyze, and the hardest habits to break, at least in my experience. My 'whims' have and still do result from bad habits developed from flawed reasoning when I was a child; they are in some cases so incredibly ingrained that it has been difficult at times to even see them. I am only now approaching a point where I would say I am even aware of all of them, let alone ready to take the time to examine them and see if they conflict with the values that consciously resonate with me.
2 - I think I might be able to give somewhat of an answer to this, but I don't think I would be satisfied with it, and it would be even more speculative than my answer to this first question. I would tentatively say that two of the 'values' that I have defined as 'justice' and 'redemption', seem to come into conflict at times, and I instinctively value redemption more highly in such a case.
3 - As my understanding of a 'value' has changed so too has my appreciation for it. But the real question is is my understanding of the 'value' changing, or am I simply acquiring a more appropriate definition for the same word I have been using for said value, and thus discovering something that is different in nature than that which I previously valued, and finding that I value this new conceptualization more-so than the old....
This is definitely one thing I don't understand: How can it be irrational to sacrifice a value for another? Isn't such a sacrifice warranted in certain circumstances?
I'll consider answering them when I have more time.
"This is definitely one thing I don't understand: How can it be irrational to sacrifice a value for another? Isn't such a sacrifice warranted in certain circumstances?"
I don't think it is irrational, according to objectivism, to choose a value over another. Tsor :P obviously values redemption over justice. Since objectivism says that one should act in accordance with his or her "hierarchy" of values, Tsor is not making a sacrifice by choosing redemption over justice. A hierarchy of values means our values have a vertical order of importance. Therefore according to Rand's definition of sacrifice, Tsor would have to choose justice over redemption for it to be considereed a "sacrifice."
I don't think it is irrational, according to objectivism, to choose a value over another. Tsor :P obviously values redemption over justice. Since objectivism says that one should act in accordance with his or her "hierarchy" of values, Tsor is not making a sacrifice by choosing redemption over justice. A hierarchy of values means our values have a vertical order of importance. Therefore according to Rand's definition of sacrifice, Tsor would have to choose justice over redemption for it to be considereed a "sacrifice."
yes :)