Editing Value theory (section)

== In various fields ==
=== Ethics ===
{{main|Ethics}}

Ethics and value theory are overlapping fields of inquiry. Ethics studies [[Morality|moral]] phenomena, focusing on how people should act or which behaviors are morally right.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Norman|2005|p=622}} | {{harvnb|Nagel|2006|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Crisp|2011|loc=§ 1. Ethics and Metaethics}} }}</ref> Value theory investigates the nature, sources, and types of values in general.<ref name="auto2"/> Some philosophers understand value theory as a subdiscipline of ethics. This is based on the idea that what people should do is affected by value considerations but not necessarily limited to them.<ref name="auto7"/> Another view sees ethics as a subdiscipline of value theory. This outlook follows the idea that ethics is concerned with moral values affecting what people can control, whereas value theory examines a broader range of values, including those beyond anyone's control.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Schroeder|2021|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Orsi|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cc3cBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA6 6–7]}} | {{harvnb|Bahm|1993|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=jqSRrmtQ_WoC&pg=PA4 4]}} | {{harvnb|Cowan|2020|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=-2jDDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA4 4]}} | {{harvnb|Hurka|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=K44RDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA357 357–358]}}}}</ref> Some perspectives contrast ethics and value theory, asserting that the [[Normativity|normative]] concepts examined by ethics are distinct from the evaluative concepts examined by value theory.<ref name="auto4"/> [[Axiological ethics]] is a subfield of ethics examining the nature and role of values from a moral perspective, with particular interest in determining which ends are worth pursuing.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Findlay|1970|pp=1–2, 4}} | {{harvnb|Kupperman|2005|pp=73–74}} }}</ref>

The ethical theory of [[consequentialism]] combines the perspectives of ethics and value theory, asserting that the rightness of an action depends on the value of its consequences. Consequentialists compare possible courses of action, saying that people should follow the one leading to the best overall consequences.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sinnott-Armstrong|2023|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Crisp|2005|pp=200–201}} | {{harvnb|Alexander|Moore|2021|loc=§ 1. Deontology's Foil: Consequentialism}} }}</ref> The overall consequences of an action are the totality of its effects, or how it impacts the world by starting a causal chain of events that would not have occurred otherwise.<ref>{{harvnb|Dorsey|2020|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=d0D8DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA97 97–98]}}</ref> Distinct versions of consequentialism rely on different theories of the sources of value. [[Classical utilitarianism]], a prominent form of consequentialism, says that moral actions produce the greatest amount of [[pleasure]] for the greatest number of people. It combines a consequentialist outlook on right action with a [[Hedonism|hedonist]] outlook on pleasure as the only source of intrinsic value.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sinnott-Armstrong|2023|loc=§ 1. Classic Utilitarianism}} | {{harvnb|Chenneville|2017|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=yn06DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA5 5]}} | {{harvnb|Hearn|1971|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=0z_z0RYmr38C&pg=PA2 2]}} }}</ref>

=== Economics ===
{{main|Economics}}
Economics is a [[social science]] studying how goods and services are produced, distributed, and consumed, both from the perspective of individual agents and societal systems.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Pape|2000|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=fYzMz3UlyaMC&pg=PA7 7]}} | {{harvnb|Welch|Welch|2009|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=O5i-d3thv-4C&pg=PA4 4]}} | {{harvnb|Mukherjee|Mukherjee|Ghose|2013|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=iVKja7n06iIC&pg=PA17 17]}} }}</ref> Economists view evaluations as a driving force underlying economic activity. They use the notion of [[economic value]] and related evaluative concepts to understand decision-making processes, resource allocation, and the impact of policies. The economic value or benefit of a [[commodity]] is the advantage it provides to an [[economic agent]], often measured in terms of what people are [[Willingness to pay|willing to pay]] for it.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Pirgmaier|2021|p=1}} | {{harvnb|Young|Loomis|2014|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=brDcAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA289 289]}} | {{harvnb|Turner|Georgiou|Clark|Brouwer|2004|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=coz0lmhjZAYC&pg=PA50 50]}} }}</ref>

Economic theories of value are frameworks to explain how economic value arises and which factors influence it. Prominent frameworks include the classical [[labor theory of value]] and the neo-classical [[marginal theory of value]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Pirgmaier|2021|pp=1, 8–9}} | {{harvnb|Ayres|2023|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=GW28EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA104 104]}} }}</ref> The labor theory, initially developed by the economists [[Adam Smith]] and [[David Ricardo]], distinguishes between [[use value]]—the utility or satisfaction a commodity provides—and [[exchange value]]—the proportion at which one commodity can be exchanged with another.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Pirgmaier|2021|p=2}} | {{harvnb|Fraser|2009}} | {{harvnb|Rogers|Castree|Kitchin|2013}} }}</ref> It focuses on exchange value, which it says is determined by the [[Socially necessary labour time|amount of labor required to produce the commodity]]. In its simplest form, it directly correlates exchange value to labor time. For example, if the time needed to hunt a deer is twice the time needed to hunt a beaver then one deer is worth two beavers.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Pirgmaier|2021|pp=2–3}} | {{harvnb|Ayres|2023|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=GW28EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA104 104]}} }}</ref> The philosopher [[Karl Marx]] extended the labor theory of value in various ways. He introduced the concept of [[surplus value]], which goes beyond the time and resources invested to explain how [[Capitalism|capitalists]] can profit from the labor of their employees.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Moseley|2023|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=43m-EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA48 48]}} | {{harvnb|Pirgmaier|2021|pp=7–8}} }}</ref>

The marginal theory of value focuses on consumption rather than production. It says that the utility of a commodity is the source of its value. Specifically, it is interested in [[marginal utility]], the additional satisfaction gained from consuming one more unit of the commodity. Marginal utility often diminishes if many units have already been consumed, leading to a decrease in the exchange value of commodities that are abundantly available.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Pirgmaier|2021|p=3}} | {{harvnb|Black|Hashimzade|Myles|2009}} }}</ref> Both the labor theory and the marginal theory were later challenged by the [[Piero Sraffa#Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities|Sraffian theory of value]].<ref>{{harvnb|Ayres|2023|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=GW28EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA104 104]}}</ref>

=== Sociology ===
{{main|Sociology}}

Sociology studies social behavior, relationships, institutions, and society at large.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Bhushan|Sachdeva|2012|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=qgZFB3UOuNkC&pg=PA4 4]}} | {{harvnb|Sharma|1996|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=QQ1nBcV_zCMC&pg=PA10 10]}} }}</ref> In their analyses and explanations of these phenomena, some sociologists use the concept of values to understand issues like [[social cohesion]] and [[Social conflict|conflict]], the norms and practices people follow, and [[collective action]]. They usually understand values as subjective attitudes possessed by individuals and shared in social groups. According to this view, values are beliefs or priorities about goals worth pursuing that guide people to act in certain ways. For example, societies that value education may invest substantial resources to ensure high-quality schooling. This subjective conception of values as aspects of individuals and social groups contrasts with the objective conceptions of values more prominent in economics, which understand values as aspects of commodities.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Karp|2000|loc=Lead section}} | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=33–34, 37, 39–40}} | {{harvnb|Tormos|2019|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=u8y8DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA11 11]}} }}</ref>

Shared values can help unite people in the pursuit of a common cause, fostering social cohesion. Value differences, by contrast, may divide people into antagonistic groups that promote conflicting projects. Some sociologists employ value research to predict how people will behave. Given the observation that someone values the environment, they may conclude that this person is more likely to [[recycle]] or support pro-environmental legislation.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Karp|2000|loc=Lead section, § Social Values}} | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=39–40, 47}} }}</ref> One approach to this type of research uses [[Values scale|value scales]], such as the [[Rokeach Value Survey]] and the [[Theory of basic human values|Schwartz theory of basic human values]], to measure the value outlook of individuals and groups.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Karp|2000|loc=Lead section, § The Rokeach Tradition, § The Schwartz Scale of Values}} | {{harvnb|Tormos|2019|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=u8y8DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA13 13–15]}} }}</ref>

=== Anthropology ===
{{main|Anthropology}}
Anthropology also studies human behavior and societies but does not limit itself to contemporary social structures, extending its focus to humanity both past and present.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Sutton|2021|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=pjAXEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA5 5]}} | {{harvnb|Fluehr-Lobban|2013|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=LUJPAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA158 158]}} }}</ref> Similar to sociologists, many anthropologists understand values as social representations of goals worth pursuing. For them, values are embedded in mental structures associated with culture and ideology about what is desirable. A slightly different approach in anthropology focuses on the practical side of values, holding that values are constantly created through human activity.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Robbins|2023|loc=§ Foundations of Value Theory, § A Third Approach to Value}} | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=53–54, 56, 58}} }}</ref>

[[Anthropological theories of value|Anthropological value theorists]] use values to compare cultures.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=3, 55}} | {{harvnb|Robbins|2023|loc=§ Foundations of Value Theory}} | {{harvnb|Sykes|2016|loc=§ Introduction}} }}</ref> They can be employed to examine similarities as universal concerns present in every society. For example, anthropologist [[Clyde Kluckhohn]] and sociologist [[Fred Strodtbeck]] proposed a set of value orientations found in every culture.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|p=54}} | {{harvnb|Robbins|2023|loc=§ Foundations of Value Theory}} }}</ref> Values can also be used to analyze differences between cultures and value changes within a culture. Anthropologist [[Louis Dumont]] followed this idea, suggesting that the cultural meaning systems in distinct societies differ in their value priorities. He argued that values are ordered hierarchically around a set of paramount values that trump all other values. For example, Dumont analyzed the [[Caste system in India|traditional Indian caste system]] as a cultural hierarchy based on the value of purity, extending from the pure [[Brahmins]] to the "[[Untouchability|untouchable]]" [[Dalits]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Robbins|2023|loc=§ Foundations of Value Theory}} | {{harvnb|Sykes|2016|loc=§ Introduction, § General Overviews}} | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=3, 61–62}} }}</ref>

The contrast between [[individualism and collectivism]] is an influential topic in cross-cultural value research. Individualism promotes values associated with the [[autonomy]] of individuals, such as [[self-directedness]], independence, and the fulfillment of personal goals. Collectivism gives priority to group-related values, like cooperation, [[conformity]], and foregoing personal advantages for the sake of collective benefits. As a rough simplification, it is often suggested that individualism is more prominent in [[Western culture]]s, whereas collectivism is more commonly observed in [[Eastern culture]]s.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Karp|2000|loc=§ Individualism and Collectivism}} | {{harvnb|Fatehi|Priestley|Taasoobshirazi|2020|pp=7–9}} | {{harvnb|Kim|2002|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=Bsr3h16zrkwC&pg=PA22 22]}} | {{harvnb|Serna|Martínez|2022|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=tIedEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA423 423]}} }}</ref>

=== Psychology ===
{{main|Psychology}}
As the study of [[Mind|mental phenomena]] and behavior, psychology contrasts with sociology and anthropology by focusing more on the perspective of individuals than the broader social and cultural contexts.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|p=4}} | {{harvnb|Woodworth|Marquis|2014|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=IXPpAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA5 5]}} }}</ref> Psychologists tend to understand values as abstract [[Motivation|motivational]] goals or general principles about what matters.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=7–8}} | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|pp=106–107}} }}</ref> From this perspective, values differ from specific plans and [[intention]]s since they are stable evaluative tendencies not bound to concrete situations.<ref>{{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=14, 19–20}}</ref>

Various psychological theories of values establish a close link between an individual's evaluative outlook and their [[personality]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=4, 11–12}} | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|p=106}} }}</ref> An early theory, formulated by psychologists [[Philip E. Vernon]] and [[Gordon Allport]], understands personality as a collection of aspects unified by a coherent [[value system]]. It distinguishes between six personality types corresponding to the value spheres of theory, economy, aesthetics, society, politics, and religion. For example, people with theoretical personalities place special importance on the [[value of knowledge]] and the discovery of [[truth]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=11–12}} | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|p=106}} }}</ref> Influenced by Vernon and Allport, psychologist [[Milton Rokeach]] conceptualized values as enduring beliefs about what goals and conduct are preferable. He divided values into the categories of instrumental and terminal values. He thought that a central aspect of personality lies in how people prioritize the values within each category.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=12–13}} | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|pp=106–107}} }}</ref> Psychologist [[Shalom Schwartz]] refined this approach by linking values to emotion and motivation. He explored how value rankings affect decisions in which the values of different options conflict.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Steinert|2023|pp=13–15}} | {{harvnb|Schwartz|Cieciuch|2016|pp=107–108}} }}</ref>