Value as a Subject-Object Relation
  • Dfpolis
    1.3k
    I recently presented a conference paper exploring the nature of value using Aristotle's analysis of subject-object relations as the actualization of potency as a paradigm. I argue that value can neither be fully quantified nor rank-ordered. Consequently, terms like "optimal decision" and "greatest utility" may be undefined. It is further argued that abstraction and the universal principles that result are often inadequate to the task of actual decision making. Valuing is seen as connatural comprehension followed by intentional commitment. If you would like to read and comment on the paper, the link is https://www.academia.edu/129563231/Value_Measure_and_Intention.
    Dfpolis Options
  • alan1000
    210
    Dfpolis, I need some help. The abstract of your article contains such outrageous grammatical errors that I am inclined to suspect either that it was written by rather poor AI, or that you are only semi-literate. The second problem is that to read the article, I have to sign on to a website, with the obvious security compromise which that entails. May I suggest that you summarise your chief arguments within this thread so that we may address them in a more expeditious way.
    alan1000 Options
  • alan1000
    210
    If it gives you any encouragement, I will comment on the original post. You assert that value can "neither be fully quantified nor rank-ordered. Consequently, terms like "optimal decision" and "greatest utility" may be undefined." This requires qualification; a moment's reflection suggests that context is important here. To a person drowning in a freshwater lake, the value of drinking water is minimal; to a person dying of thirst in a desert, it is everything. All valuation, by definition, is relative; to the person dying in the desert, the value of drinking water will be at the top of any conceivable scale, and therefore, can be objectively quantified, for the purposes of that scale.
    alan1000 Options
  • Leontiskos
    5.1k
    The abstract of your article contains such outrageous grammatical errors that I am inclined to suspect either that it was written by rather poor AI, or that you are only semi-literate. — alan1000

    You are mistaken. There are no grammatical errors in the abstract.

    It looks like an interesting article.

    The second problem is that to read the article, I have to sign on to a website, with the obvious security compromise which that entails. — alan1000

    Academia.edu is a highly regarded website, and your idea that having to sign in is prohibitive doesn't make much sense. You also have to sign in on TPF, after all.
    Leontiskos Options
  • Astorre
    171
    I was unable to read your article, unfortunately. You claim that value cannot be quantified, but the question arises: why should value be quantified or ranked in the first place? If the goal is to choose the least of evils, this approach is known as utilitarianism. Are you criticizing utilitarianism?
    Astorre Options
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.

Sign In Create Account

Categories