Editing Value theory (section)

== Methods ==
Value theorists employ various [[Methodology|methods]] to conduct their inquiries, justify theories, and measure values. [[Ethical intuitionism|Intuitionists]] rely on [[intuition]]s to assess evaluative claims. In this context, an intuition is an immediate apprehension or understanding of a [[self-evident]] claim, meaning that its truth can be assessed without [[Inference|inferring]] it from another observation.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Stratton-Lake|2020|loc=§ 1.1 Intuition}} | {{harvnb|Audi|2004|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=S_RrKGcgSewC&pg=PA2 2, 5]}} | {{harvnb|Martin|2002|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vNvXkFUbfM8C&pg=PA166 166]}} | {{harvnb|Li|2014|pp=4–5}} | {{harvnb|Dabbagh|2022|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=jwuHEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA53 53]}} }}</ref> Value theorists often rely on [[thought experiments]] to gain this type of understanding. Thought experiments are imagined scenarios that exemplify philosophical problems. Philosophers use [[Counterfactual thinking|counterfactual reasoning]] to evaluate possible consequences and gain insight into underlying problems.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Martin|2002|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vNvXkFUbfM8C&pg=PA166 166]}} | {{harvnb|Zaibert|2018|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=E1FSDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA37 37–38]}} | {{harvnb|Brown|Fehige|2019|loc=Lead Section}} | {{harvnb|Goffi|Roux|2011|pp=165, 168–169}} }}</ref> For example, philosopher [[Robert Nozick]] imagines an [[experience machine]] that can virtually simulate an ideal life. Based on his contention that people would not want to spend the rest of their lives in this pleasurable simulation, Nozick argues against the [[Hedonism|hedonist]] claim that pleasure is the only source of intrinsic value. According to him, the thought experiment shows that the value of an authentic connection to reality is not reducible to pleasure.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Heathwood|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=uvzVBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA146 146–147]}} | {{harvnb|Tiberius|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=uvzVBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA163 163–164]}} }}</ref>{{efn|Moore's isolation test is another influential thought experiment about intrinsic value.<ref name="auto1"/>}}

[[Phenomenology (philosophy)|Phenomenologists]] provide a detailed first-person description of the [[experience]] of values. They closely examine emotional experiences, ranging from desire, interest, and preference to feelings in the form of love and hate. However, they do not limit their inquiry to these phenomena, asserting that values permeate experience at large.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Davis|Steinbock|2024|loc=§ 3. Value Personalism}} | {{harvnb|Direk|2014|pp=371–372}} | {{harvnb|Grünberg|1990|pp=199–201}} | {{harvnb|Hart|1997|pp=1–2, 6–7}} }}</ref> A key aspect of the phenomenological method is to [[Epoche|suspend preconceived ideas and judgments]] to understand the essence of experiences as they present themselves to consciousness.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Smith|loc=§ b. Phenomenological Reduction}} | {{harvnb|Staiti|2020|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=TGMPEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA368 368–369]}} }}</ref>

The analysis of concepts and [[Ordinary language philosophy|ordinary language]] is another method of inquiry. By examining terms and sentences used to talk about values, value theorists aim to clarify their meanings, uncover crucial distinctions, and formulate arguments for and against axiological theories.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moritz|1972|pp=[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-010-2424-2_3 33–46]}} | {{harvnb|Schroeder|2021|loc=§ Basic Questions}} }}</ref> For instance, a prominent dispute between [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalists]] and [[Ethical non-naturalism|non-naturalists]] hinges on the [[conceptual analysis]] of the term ''[[good]]'', in particular, whether its meaning can be analyzed through natural terms, like ''[[pleasure]]''.<ref name="auto5">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Laskowski|Finlay|2017|pp=537–539}} | {{harvnb|Chrisman|2016|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=JiklDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA79 79]}} }}</ref>{{efn|This problem is the main topic of Moore's controversial [[open-question argument]].<ref name="auto5"/>}}

[[File:Schwartz theory of basic human values.svg|thumb|alt=Circular diagram showing the relations between different types of values, represented by segments|The [[Theory of basic human values|Schwartz theory of basic human values]] is an instrument to measure value priorities. It arranges different values in a circle, using [[angular distance]] between values to indicate how compatible they are.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|pp=109–113}} | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|Vecchione|Davidov|2012|p=669}} }}</ref>]]

In the [[social sciences]], value theorists face the challenge of measuring the evaluative outlook of individuals and groups. Specifically, they aim to determine personal value hierarchies, for example, whether a person gives more weight to truth than to moral goodness or beauty.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|pp=106, 108}} | {{harvnb|Hiles|2008|p=53}} | {{harvnb|Karp|2000|loc=Lead section}} }}</ref> They distinguish between direct and indirect measurement methods. Direct methods involve asking people straightforward questions about what things they value and which value priorities they have. This approach assumes that people are aware of their evaluative outlook and able to articulate it accurately. Indirect methods do not share this assumption, asserting instead that values guide behavior and choices on an unconscious level. Consequently, they observe how people decide and act, seeking to infer the underlying value attitudes responsible for picking one course of action rather than another.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|pp=106–107}} | {{harvnb|Powe|2007|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=QpIgHPHmegsC&pg=PA123 123]}} }}</ref>

Various catalogs or [[Values scale|scales of values]] have been proposed to measure value priorities. The [[Rokeach Value Survey]] considers a total of 36 values divided into two groups: instrumental values, like honesty and capability, which serve as means to promote terminal values, such as freedom and family security. It asks participants to rank the values based on their impact on the participants' lives, aiming to understand the relative importance assigned to each of them. The [[Theory of basic human values|Schwartz theory of basic human values]] is a modification of the Rokeach Value Survey that seeks to provide a more cross-cultural and universal assessment. It arranges the values in a circular manner to reflect that neighboring values are compatible with each other, such as openness to change and self-enhancement, while values on opposing sides may conflict with each other, such as openness to change and conservation.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|pp=109–113}} | {{harvnb|Karp|2000|loc=§ The Rokeach tradition, § The Schwartz Scale of Values}} }}</ref>