What are Values?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

It seems wrong to say she and I have different values. We have the same values, and we probably even have them prioritized in approximately the same way. I think our disagreement is much less fundamental than O’Reilly and other culture warriors would have you believe.

---

I agree that you share the same values with this woman and this particular disagreement could be an example of a different perceptions rather than weighting of values. I assume that she values fairness but feels ambivalence over the issue, worrying that gay marriage violates her values of tradition and sanctity. I feel no such ambivalence and I bet you don't either, arguably because we don't perceive gay marriage as violating the value of sanctity.

But a lot of other political disagreements do boil down to value priorities. The health care debate involved a lot of harm reduction vs. individualism. I assume that most Americans value both, but you could reliably predict support or opposition to Obamacare based on which they prioritized.

In religion, the road IS the goal, and the Golden Rule is a simple value that anyone can understand and if they live by it, they can safely travel through life on the middle path. The real action in religion is through prayer, though.
In politics winning by 51% can be better than winning by 75% because you get to keep your conservative or liberal values more potent. But again, the real action goes on behind closed doors.
In both cases, it is a given that most people have no clue of what's going on.

As transsexual christian conservative, my values are a tad 'askew' from the rest of my political friends & foes.
As far as 'values' outside of the political relm, 'the 'golden rule' still applies.

The golden rule embodies a number of values but is not a value in and of itself. The things you and I value, love, liberty, friendship, security, fairness, etc. are all ideals that nobody denies. Our political disagreements are NOT disagreements on values. We disagree on what political institutions best embody those values and perhaps on which values trump others.

I remember when politics was about values, now it's about motives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

The golden rule embodies a number of values but is not a value in and of itself. The things you and I value, love, liberty, friendship, security, fairness, etc. are all ideals that nobody denies. Our political disagreements are NOT disagreements on values. We disagree on what political institutions best embody those values and perhaps on which values trump others.

---

Ok Trish you got me on this one, I have to agree with you a 100% with this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

The golden rule embodies a number of values but is not a value in and of itself. The things you and I value, love, liberty, friendship, security, fairness, etc. are all ideals that nobody denies. Our political disagreements are NOT disagreements on values. We disagree on what political institutions best embody those values and perhaps on which values trump others.

---

Wrong. The "golden rule", or the principle of reciprocity, is the universal code of human interaction. It's the basis of all morals & ethics. Without that, there's no society & therefore no values other than how fast you can run to escape predators in your hermitage. All the rest of the blather is just an attempt to explain it or make excuses for ignoring it.

Nevertheless the golden rule is not a value. It is a rule which if universally followed would in most cases have people treat each other fairly as equals. Some of the values embodied by the golden rule are equality, fairness and respect. If the golden rule didn't propagate these values and others through its implementation, then it we wouldn't have any reason to value the rule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

The golden rule embodies a number of values but is not a value in and of itself. The things you and I value, love, liberty, friendship, security, fairness, etc. are all ideals that nobody denies. Our political disagreements are NOT disagreements on values. We disagree on what political institutions best embody those values and perhaps on which values trump others.

---

I dont see how values can be ideals -you can work toward the realisation of an ideal- such as a happier life- and achieve it or not. But with regard to liberty and fairness in particular, these values relate to real things, real people and real situations which you may encounter every day, and which can be as it were, realised. Some are coded in law, others in normative behaviour. The mistake I think is to assume values are some kind of idea floating around detached from reality, whereas they do relate to reality rather than utopia.

When Tony Blair and George W Bush said that the aggressors on 9/11 were attacking 'our values' they used the concept to avoid discussing the real issues which bin Laden had been publicising ever since he issued his so-called 'fatwa' in 1996 called A Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terroris...atwa_1996.html

Bin Laden had a political agenda, neither of the two political leaders wanted to get into the political debate about the issues bin Laden raised, and thus shifted the debate to an appeal to 'values', much as Reagan did, although he did then negotiate missile reductions with the head of the Evil Empire. Values, after all, do not grow on trees, they come from our experience of life.

You can SELL people Laddy GaGa, Mozart, Beatles, NWA, etc, but unless they have a feel for it they won't BUY it.