My pressing question is to understand value's role in the behavior of people.  Economists Sinden & Worrell provide an essential view for understanding values that can also be applied to the non-material.

They make the point that the value of a thing is only reflected in the process of exchange.

For example, the value of an item is not what you pay for it;  value is not equal to price.  Instead, the value of an item is what you could possibly get for it under varying  circumstances.   The value of an item (or, I will demonstrate, a belief or action) is relative to the circumstances under which it is being evaluated.  For example, a styrofoam square, worth a dollar in the store, might be worth whatever money could be produced if you were stranded in the middle of the ocean.

To apply that definition to behavioral values we would restate that the value of a belief -- like honesty with others -- is the most benefit I might get for it in any given moment's circumstances.  That benefit might be my perception of the estimation of others or my own estimation of myself.   Here's a very coarse example:

What's the value of honesty when Aunt Ellen asks if I like the new flannel nightgown Christmas present she's just lovingly foisted on me?   The value of being honest in this situation can be affected by a number of qualifiers.  My decision to be honest could be  affected by her value to me and/or what I perceive to be her values.

To continue the example, how does the worth of my honesty change if I'm under examination on the stand in a courtroom where someone's life is at stake?

The answer to that question might  be predicated on yet another system of values that has its own system of rewards.  Is the integrity of my answers and the changes it may make in someone else more important to me than the misguided pleasure of Aunt Ellen in her choice for me?  Do I get more payoff from taking a risk to be honest than I do from making her feel happy?  Can I be intimidated by other systems into adhering to or not adhering to my preference to be an honest person?

Sinden & Worrell explain that price cannot  equal value because there is always some surplus.  There are always values that are hidden from the actual exchange of a thing.  In terms of material goods, the producer might  have sold it for a little less or you might have paid a little more.  In applying this concept to behavioral issues, your Aunt Ellen might have been completely willing to hear the truth.  She might even have been grateful to hear it.  On the other hand, she might have cut you out of her will.  Or you may pay too heavy an emotional price for bending over to please her.  Or you might have been willing to be even more expressive in your thanks and gone out and bought a flannel nightcap to wear with it.

Can we extrapolate further and look at complex value phenomena like reacting with compassion  in a hard-driving, seemingly uncaring world?

Assuming it is possible to do so, how deep must we look to find a value that stands on its own, exclusive of the values to which producers and consumers might assign it?   William James would say that to the extent they might exist, they are of our own creation.  Freud would say that a value this core would be the property of the id.  Skinner would say that if such a value exists, it would be present only because it has been reinforced.

The closest we might get  to finding values to examine which affect internal attitudes that can exist in a psychological vacuum is to examine an experience like self honesty.  How then does Sinden & Worrell's fluctuating measure of value and cost apply to this inner experience?   In a non-material view of their definition, we would say that the value of a belief -- like honesty with one's self -- is the most benefit I might get for it in any given moment's circumstances.   The benefit to me in self honesty will narrow to whatever value I derive from my own estimation of myself weighed against what?   Are there circumstances under which this estimation can be less valueable?  Perhaps in the situation where the needs of one's psyche are such that to know might threaten one's psychological or even physiological stability?  Certainly there are such situations where even a person with the deepest integrity may find herself refusing to acknowledge the truth or, our in the words of our example, devaluing self honesty.

In economics, values get mapped to a single dimension to the extent possible.  And, at least based on this simple analysis, it appears that applying this logic to the emotional realities of relating in the world with each other and juggling our personal codes of integrity, the lines of that single dimension remain valid.
 
  

Links that relate to Sinden & Worrel's  work:  Costs and Cost Trends for     Forestry Practices in the     South  Handbook of Environmental     Evaluation

   Citation
       Feedback