Talk:Value (philosophy)

Removal of headers
Please be careful before deleting any headers in this article. Most of them are directly linked from other articles. Look at What links here before any header removal. With goodness in mind (talk) 08:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The order of writing
Absolute values ought to be mentioned first and tool like values only after that. Culture dependent values are likely to be a mixture of absolute and tool like arrangement dependent values, so they ought to be mentioned after the division to absolute and tool like values has been introduced.InsectIntelligence (talk) 19:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Tool like values and the evolution
The evolution shaped us to reach for the best survival, so the tool like values toward that goal are absolute values to us: being fit makes us feel good and survive well in life. InsectIntelligence (talk) 19:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Wise said. Unfortunately, it will be hard to find a definite and reliable source to it. The world deserves the truth (talk) 18:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

 * Value (philosophy) →  — The whole article deals with "ethic or philosophic value", but ethics may be regarded as a subdivision of philosophy, and the whole article, as far as I can see, only deals with that subdivision. For instance, intrinsic value already has (ethics) as an attribute. I know many redirects need to be changed, but I can deal with the main part of that. — The world deserves the truth (talk) 11:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The article is a bit messy, but it does speak about values other than ethics (e.g. economics). It would be sensible to discuss before moving. 87.114.17.201 (talk) 13:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The fact that it doesn't clearly mean ethic value specifically probably contributes significantly to the mess. Value (economics) already has an own article - the article just describes the possible correlation between it and ethic value. I suggest this discussion be continued on its talk page. The world deserves the truth (talk) 17:49, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Anybody disagree with a move? The world deserves the truth (talk) 05:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * You will have to rework the page. e.g. "a radio is instrumentally good in order to hear music" has nothing to do with ethics (does it?) 87.112.72.119 (talk) 21:36, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, I have many plans for the page if it was more specified regarding the subject. For instance, instrumentally good things affect whether it may be regarded right or wrong to listen to a radio; if it is instrumentally good, then it may still be right. In one way or another, I think everything in the article is more or less related to ethics. The world deserves the truth (talk) 05:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Splitting instead
On second thought, there seem to evidence enough for a distinction between value in philosophy generally and ethic value. So, rather than moving everything to the ethic aspect, perhaps it is better to fork away the obviously ethic part (which, in my point of view, is the majority of the article). The article could have a summary of it, explaining what specifically makes it ethic, and what distinguishes them. Then we have all the time of the world to expand them separately and perhaps add further distinctions. The world deserves the truth (talk) 15:04, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think having a subsection named "Ethic value" would be practically suitable, since too many What links here would have to be redirected to a subheader that might be unstable. The world deserves the truth (talk) 15:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)