#value theory

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Dignity

The philosophy of dignity explores the inherent worth of individuals and the moral, political, and metaphysical implications of treating people with respect. Dignity is central to human rights discourse, ethics, and legal frameworks, and it raises deep questions about autonomy, recognition, and the nature of personhood.

Key Themes in the Philosophy of Dignity:

1. Inherent Worth

At its core, dignity is the idea that all human beings possess intrinsic value, not because of their achievements, status, or utility, but simply by virtue of being human. This belief underpins the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which opens by affirming the “inherent dignity” of all members of the human family.

2. Kantian Moral Philosophy

Immanuel Kant is one of the most influential figures in the philosophy of dignity. He argued that human beings, as rational agents capable of moral judgment, must always be treated as ends in themselves and never merely as means. For Kant, dignity is grounded in autonomy—our capacity for self-governance according to moral law.

3. Dignity and Autonomy

Modern liberal philosophy often links dignity to individual autonomy. To respect someone's dignity is to respect their right to make choices about their own life. This principle informs debates on medical ethics, freedom of speech, and bodily autonomy.

4. Relational and Social Dignity

Contemporary thinkers like Axel Honneth and Martha Nussbaum expand dignity into the social sphere, arguing that people need recognition from others to fully realize their dignity. From this view, dignity is not only intrinsic but also shaped by how society treats individuals—especially marginalized groups.

5. Violations of Dignity

Philosophically, dignity is also understood through its negation: humiliation, degradation, torture, and discrimination all violate dignity by treating people as less than fully human. These violations justify moral outrage and legal protection.

6. Dignity and Equality

Dignity often intersects with egalitarian philosophy: if every person has equal dignity, then social systems must reflect justice, fairness, and non-discrimination. It challenges hierarchies and oppression by asserting a moral baseline of respect owed to all.

Summary:

The philosophy of dignity affirms the unconditional moral worth of individuals and calls for recognition, respect, and ethical treatment of all persons. Whether viewed through Kantian ethics, human rights, or social justice lenses, dignity functions as a foundational concept in moral and political philosophy, guiding how we relate to one another in both personal and institutional contexts.

[dustedandsocial]

Michael Heinrich, "The Present Political Value of Marx's Value Theory"

Science & Society event at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 3/21/2024

[frank-olivier]

Art, Value, and the Visible Hand of the Market: Understanding the Invisible Forces at Play

The art world's metamorphosis into a luxury goods market has sparked intense debate about the commodification of creative works. A personal account of discovering a potentially valuable Mark Chagall print at an estate sale illustrates the complexities of this issue. Initially, the thrill of the find was eclipsed by insecurity, prompting a misguided attempt to legitimize the print's value through false claims of institutional validation. This anecdote serves as a microcosm for the art world's deeply ingrained desire for financial legitimacy, often prioritized over an artwork's intrinsic cultural, historical, or emotional significance.

The art market's emphasis on financial value is, in part, a legacy of its historically Eurocentric construction. Traditional art historical narratives have privileged Western artistic lineages, influencing the market's tendency to valorize works based on their proximity to these canons. The authentication process, once a means of verifying provenance, has evolved into a mechanism for conferring financial value. The Andy Warhol Art Authentication Board's contentious history, including a notable lawsuit, highlights the intricate web of interests driving the art market's validation apparatus.

The exponential growth of the Ultra High Net Worth Individuals (UHNWI) in the art market has further solidified the notion that artistic value is inextricably linked to financial worth. The proliferation of art-backed loans and the Mei Moses Fine Art Index, which tracks artworks' financial performance, has created a self-reinforcing ecosystem where art is increasingly treated as a luxury commodity. This development has profound implications for the way art is created, exchanged, and perceived.

Andrea Fraser's critique of the art world's complicity in its own commodification serves as a poignant reminder of the need for critical self-reflection. By acknowledging the inherent contradictions within the system, Fraser encourages stakeholders to reevaluate their participation in the art market. However, a more nuanced approach might involve recognizing the complex interplay between creative, cultural, and financial values, rather than simply opting out of the system.

Reclaiming the intrinsic value of art necessitates a multifaceted strategy. This could involve institutions and collectors actively promoting a broader definition of artistic value, one that encompasses cultural, emotional, and creative significance alongside financial worth. Moreover, fostering greater transparency within the art market, particularly regarding authentication and valuation processes, could help mitigate the influence of financial speculation. By embracing this more holistic understanding of artistic value, the art world can work towards a more equitable and sustainable ecosystem, one where creative expression is not solely beholden to financial interests.

Why I Lied to ArtNet - The Financialization of Art (Shannon Kim, November 2024)

Tuesday, November 19, 2024

[bsahely]

From Locke to Life: A Manifesto for Regenerative Governance | ChatGPT4o

[Download Full Document (PDF)] This document, titled From Locke to Life, presents a manifesto for regenerative governance, critiquing the philosophical foundations of modern political economy and proposing a new framework based on life-value. It traces the legacy of John Locke’s social contract and property theory, illustrating how these ideas have contributed to ecological degradation and social…

[itsmadhvi]

Ramayana: Learning Values That Matter

The Ramayana, known as the "first poem," is an epic that conveys lessons about duty, morality, and sacrifice through the journey of Rama and Sita. It illustrates key values such as righteousness, courage, and truth while reflecting human behavior.

The Ramayana, often called the “Adikavya” or “first poem,” is more than just an epic story—it’s a guide to life. With its deep lessons about duty, morality, sacrifice, and righteousness, it has influenced generations and continues to resonate with us today. But how can we draw wisdom from this ancient text, and what values does it teach? Let’s break it down. What Is the Ramayana? At its core,…

[republicansaredomesticterrorists]

This guy is nuts and doesn’t belong anywhere near the White House.

[tr1ppykay]

the more i participate in discussions of transmasculine issues, the more disgusted i become at the approach a lot of "trans inclusive" feminists have towards transmascs...

feminist theory exists to serve the real life people that are harmed by patriarchy. if theory is not sufficiently serving real human beings who are desperately looking for acknowledgment of their suffering, then it must be rewritten to make room for that acknowledgment. if transmasculine people are all telling you about discrimination they have experienced, and how feminist theory does not make room to talk about their unique relationship with gender based oppression, you modify the theory to make room. you don't bash them over the head with writing that doesn't account for their existence.

feminism is not a fundamentalist religion. it is a conversation that must account for new perspectives and evolve to encompass them if we want to make any progress. but many feminists who discount transmasculine experiences want to treat the current state of feminist theory as a bible of unwavering truth: if men who face gendered oppression aren't mentioned, then trans men must be wrong about their lived experiences. of course, your precious theory could never have blind spots!

[hydrossity-zone]

@sonilverweek Day 3: Gardening

[click for better quality!]

[cabbagestrand]

oh, to be taken care of

[cheruv-ii]

The ableism in this fandom is actually vile.

This shouldn't even be a QUESTION. Yes, disabilities transcend EVERY universe, if Brooklynn became an amputee at 18/19 in canon, she became an amputee in every universe no matter the circumstances. You do NOT erase a character's disability for the sake of plot or "would it be more interesting?"

On that topic, insinuating that an au would be more interesting if the disabled character was able bodied is disgusting, its grossly ableist and should not be something you consider. Brooklynn. Is. Disabled. You can write a different reason for her losing her arm in aus where dinosaurs aren't around, but you cannot write it out or push it back.

Also, referring to her pre-amputation as "whole" is also incredibly, once again, ableist. She is still whole, she is human, disabled people are not objects and they do not become less than after an amputation. Whether or not the words were purposeful they were still vile.

Ableism is so deeply engrained in every fandom (and honestly the media as well a lot of the time) and as a disabled person myself it's so goddamn tiring, I just want to be in a fandom or watch a show that doesn't make me feel subhuman because I'm not able bodied.

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Axiology

Axiology is the branch of philosophy that studies values, including those of ethics and aesthetics. It focuses on understanding what constitutes "value" and seeks to explore the nature, origins, and criteria of what is considered valuable or worth pursuing in human life. Axiology is often divided into two major fields:

Ethics (Moral Values): Examines questions related to what is morally right or wrong, just or unjust, and the principles by which we make ethical judgments. Ethical axiologists explore theories of what it means to live a good life and the foundational basis of moral duties, obligations, and virtues.

Aesthetics (Aesthetic Values): Concerns itself with the nature of beauty, art, and taste. Aesthetic axiology explores the nature of artistic value, the criteria by which art and beauty are judged, and whether beauty is subjective (dependent on individual experience) or objective (having an inherent quality).

Key Questions in Axiology

Nature of Value: What does it mean for something to have value? Does value exist independently of human perception, or is it a construct of human experience?

Objective vs. Subjective Value: Are values universal and objective, or do they depend on individual or cultural perspectives?

Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Value: Is something valuable in itself (intrinsic) or only valuable as a means to an end (extrinsic)?

Value Theories in Ethics and Aesthetics: How do we determine what is ethically good, beautiful, or desirable? What is the basis for moral and aesthetic judgments?

Role of Values in Life and Society: How do values shape individual lives, cultures, and societies? How do moral and aesthetic values influence human behavior and social institutions?

Philosophical Perspectives on Axiology

Objectivism in Value Theory: Argues that values exist independently of human beliefs or feelings. For instance, objectivists may hold that there are universal moral truths that apply to all people at all times, or that beauty has inherent qualities regardless of perception.

Subjectivism and Relativism: Maintains that values depend on personal or cultural perspectives. Ethical relativists, for example, believe that moral principles are not absolute but are shaped by cultural or individual differences. Similarly, in aesthetics, beauty might be seen as subjective and varying according to personal or cultural preferences.

Utilitarianism and Consequentialism: Emphasize value in terms of outcomes, such as happiness, utility, or pleasure. For example, in ethics, an act’s value is judged by its capacity to produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

Deontological and Virtue Ethics: In ethics, these theories look at the inherent moral value of actions or character traits, rather than their consequences. Deontology values actions based on adherence to duty or moral law, while virtue ethics values character traits like honesty, compassion, and courage.

Aesthetic Theories of Beauty and Art: Some philosophers, like Immanuel Kant, argue that aesthetic judgments have a basis in universal feelings of harmony, while others, like Friedrich Nietzsche, believe that beauty and art derive value from their power to express individuality and challenge norms.

Influence of Axiology

Axiology plays a significant role in shaping our understanding of both personal and societal ideals. For instance, in ethics, it informs discussions on human rights, justice, and morality. In aesthetics, it influences how we interpret and appreciate art, nature, and cultural artifacts. Axiology also intersects with fields like psychology, sociology, and economics, impacting everything from individual well-being to policies around art funding and human welfare.

By clarifying what we value and why, axiology provides insight into human motivation, guiding the ethical frameworks and aesthetic standards by which we live. It helps us question and refine what is worthwhile in life, leading to a deeper understanding of human purpose, fulfillment, and social harmony.

[idkwhyyouaskingm3-blog]

Is the MP definitely Trevor Herbert or is he the MP in the same way Elias Bouchard was the CEO of the Magnus Institute. I mean a homeless man would be an easy target or body snatching.

[jammatown919]

The Netflix Family YouTube account just released a "Ben and Gia's best moments" video and it made me realize something.

The comparison of Bengia to Yasammy didn't start in season three. The very first mention of Ben's girlfriend, way back in season one, was part of Ben's response to Sammy's concerns about Yaz not answering her phone. Sammy is worried and fretting, while Ben claims that he would not be in his relationship in the same situation. The next time we hear about Ben's girlfriend, Ben is alluding to his own relationship struggles to comfort Yaz about the argument she just had with Sammy.

While the comparisons of them in season three, Bengia being happy while Yasammy is struggling, didn't feel great to me, I do think I understand the reason now to be comparing these couples in any capacity. For the most part, I think it's to make Ben a better-equipped support for Yaz and Sammy.

He knows what it's like to be in a long-distance relationship where communication with his partner is probably not as frequent as either of them would like. He understands that aspect of their struggles better than anyone else. I do think Brooklynn is going to be a useful perspective as well, but Brooklynn's relationship with Kenji was ruined by the mistakes that were made. We also need the perspective of someone who has figured out how to maintain a healthy relationship. Both of them are going to be important for Yaz and Sammy to take notes from.

Especially in season one, Ben brings up his relationship in support of Yasammy. He tells Yaz he gets it, he knows how hard relationships can be, but "it'll work out, you and Sammy have a good thing going". While it's less explicit while he's talking to Sammy, there is still some semblance of "I've been in your shoes". He doesn't necessarily say it, but there's an air of telling her she doesn't need to fret so much about Yaz, and considering that her fretting and coddling was one of the primary things that drove Yaz to leave Texas, that is an important thing for her to hear.

In season three, we get to see a lot of Ben and Gia being happy and not a lot of Yaz and Sammy being happy. But I think there will be a payoff to that. We now know 100% that Ben is in a real, healthy relationship and have a better understanding of his position and how it can be used to advise others. He's always been the OG Yasammy supporter, after all.

We probably won't see Gia again next season, but her influence could be really good for the Yasammy reconciliation because of how it allows Ben to offer his perspective.

[venusiinfurss]

i truly think sunny is going to end with either macdennis kiss or macdennis full penetration (no in-between) and then dennis has an existential crisis walks outside gets hit by a car and dies. cut to black end of series

[acopytopy]

The Trust Value system punishes heroes for doing the wrong things or having the wrong intentions.

Nice lied a lot and exploited Lin Ling’s work, causing LL to attempt suicide -> Nice commits suicide, LL inherits everything he has by lying

Enlighter wanted to take down Nice due to personal feelings, not caring if he hurts his target -> He asks questions that can ONLY be answered by Lin Ling (even Moon didn’t know the answer)

E-Soul becomes distant from his fanbase and only keeps up appearances -> He’s killed by his biggest fan in a giant performance

Yang Cheng killed E-Soul, a hero -> His personality changes to reflect ES and he begins suffering the same fate

Why is it called Trust instead of Belief or Worship? Because Trust can be betrayed.

[for-the-love-of-this]

How is it that Jax managed to be less mean than Ragatha?

(This sort of serves as a part two to my tadc main theme analysis post)

Jax uses the words "like" and "sad."

Ragatha uses the words "annoying" and "happy."

Like and sad contradict each other.

Annoying and happy contradict each other.

(The word annoying could've been "I don't like it," but intentionally wasn't)

All in all, both have a positive and a negative connotation, but one line is meant to be hurtful.

Jax (unintentionally) was being nice. If what I said in my prior post applies here, this means that he was simply saying that he likes Gangle better when she's being herself; when she's not hiding her true identity. The main face she's stuck with every time the comedy mask breaks is the real her, and she shouldn't keep hiding herself.

You can argue that she's used to Jax's rudeness. Either way, Gangle is able to stand her ground even after hearing something that (on the surface) sounds pretty mean. And Jax has always managed to keep the mask away from her.

But when Ragatha spoke to her in a similar fashion, Gangle's reaction changed. She has to walk away.

Here's the difference. Ragatha states that Gangle is annoying when she wears her happy mask/fake personality (yes, she calls Gangle annoying AND fake in the same breath, subliminally).

It's a more cruel version of what Jax said. She is someone who has shown little to no lack of concern with most characters, but the truth serum (a.k.a the pink sauce) caused Ragatha's irritation to rise to the surface... and perhaps a character flaw akin to jealousy? This was after Ragatha told her she's way more responsible... "Why are you even the boss anyway?"