Because when we value something we are viewing it in a certain way, as having certain features. This might help determine whether there is anything that objectively fits that way of thinking. And that would be "a value".

But isn't something intrinsically valuable because it's not tied to anything else, like needs or desires. Needs though would be better connected than desires.

Good point

I don't think pleasure has much value at all, let alone intrinsic value.

I think we need to make a distinction between value and we valuing something. Somethings are valuable because they are beneficial to a creature (such as health). On the other hand, we value things because it gives us pleasure (art for example). There's a difference between those two cases.

.

what is the value of philosophy?

Hmm. I think of Philosophy as having both intrinsic and extrinsic value. Extrinsic value because, if done right, it leads to clarity of though, removal of biases, and a gradual approach to truth. For me, doing philosophy also has intrinsic value--because it is so much fun!!

Which was the impetus of my prior post. We can look at what we value, but we can't determine what has actual value from that because we seem to inherently know value even when we don't value it. I can throw my entire life into meaningless hedonism, valuing only the next fix of pleasure, but I would think that upon reflection (assuming I haven't destroyed my ability for reflection), I'd realize I am seeking those things that ought not be sought.

The road to recovery is often paved with reevaluating how one is living one's life and steering themselves in the direction of valuing the truly valuable. And I use "recovery" here to mean from anything meaningless, even if it's just from living a previously unexamined life.

For me, doing philosophy also has intrinsic value--because it is so much fun!! — Mitchell

Would it not if it weren't fun? I'd think its value exceeds that of a good massage, even should the good massage be more fun.

I just am puzzled that the economy has perverted value into utility.

And, if we all know what is intrinsically valuable why don't we show it in action and deed? Such as wanting a free education in the US or saving Social Security or increasing funding for education in general. In other words, why are our priorities misaligned with what is of intrinsic value?

The pleasure you get from wine or other things has intrinsic value. It's your experience regardless of where it come from.

Experiences are complex. The pleasure we take in a glass of wine, comes from its color, its vibrancy, its taste and its aftertaste, its terroir; all together the rhapsody of the sensations and memories, in which we may find pleasure. We don't experience raw, pure pleasures on their own and therefore we can't value them as such. We value experience as a whole, not its parts. Pleasure itself is never experienced on its own, it is always experienced in relation to something else, as a means to an end, but never as the end, therefore pleasure cannot be the good, since what is good always an end, which is always intrinsically valuable.

Similar goals does not dictate similar political views. We both may want cheap and high quality medical care (who wouldn't?), but we may still debate the best way to acheive that (e.g. higher taxes versus free enterprise solutions).

And what happened to pragmatism? Surely there are better and wose ways but then there's the matter of how efficient they may be and picking which method is best on that basis.

A diverse group will inevitably arrive at diverse solutions, and all will insist theirs is the most efficient.

A two-party system is diverse?