Re: My Philosophy

[Guest guest]

Are values constrained by what society defines as morally acceptable?Short answer: No. What comes to mind for me is cock fights in Hawaii, which are part of the culture. Hawaiians might accept cock fighting, but I never will. But what if I had been born into that culture? Who knows.

I'm not sure of what you meant by your first question...

Helena

Re: My Philosophy

Another question I have is :Are values constrained by what society defines as morally acceptable? > > > > > > > > > > Soozy, > > > > > > > > > > I applaud you in choosing and pursuing your own ACT values, whatever they > > > > > may be and without regard to what anyone else says. Especially me. > > > > > > > > > > I was just relating my own experience in hope that it might be helpful to > > > > > someone on the list in choosing practical, workable values. > > > > > > > > > > Apologies if I offended anyone else. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards to all, > > > > > Tom Hardy > > > > > > > > > > > >> >>

[Guest guest]

The first question is not a question at all is fact a statement (sorry my bad)

but interesting to hear your answer to the question.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Soozy,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I applaud you in choosing and pursuing your own ACT values, whatever

they

> > > > > > may be and without regard to what anyone else says. Especially me.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I was just relating my own experience in hope that it might be

helpful to

> > > > > > someone on the list in choosing practical, workable values.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Apologies if I offended anyone else.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Best regards to all,

> > > > > > Tom Hardy

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Likewise a Hawaiian living in the USA may value cock-fighting which likewise

falls out of the USA societies morale standards but is no less valid a value.

Just an observation.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Soozy,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I applaud you in choosing and pursuing your own ACT values, whatever

they

> > > > > > may be and without regard to what anyone else says. Especially me.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I was just relating my own experience in hope that it might be

helpful to

> > > > > > someone on the list in choosing practical, workable values.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Apologies if I offended anyone else.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Best regards to all,

> > > > > > Tom Hardy

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

oops my bad again Hawaii is in the USA. lol

correstion: please replace USA with non-Hawaiian state in the USA.

Thanks for your patience for my incompetence.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Soozy,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I applaud you in choosing and pursuing your own ACT values,

whatever they

> > > > > > > may be and without regard to what anyone else says. Especially me.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I was just relating my own experience in hope that it might be

helpful to

> > > > > > > someone on the list in choosing practical, workable values.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Apologies if I offended anyone else.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Best regards to all,

> > > > > > > Tom Hardy

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I know what you meant -- the USA mainland. And it is culturally accepted in Hawaii only -- not in the mainland, AFAIK.

I think we are getting off track on what values mean in ACT. I am getting caught up in semantics and losing focus, so I'll back out of this discussion for now before I really mess up!

Helena

Re: My Philosophy

oops my bad again Hawaii is in the USA. lolcorrestion: please replace USA with non-Hawaiian state in the USA.Thanks for your patience for my incompetence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Soozy, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I applaud you in choosing and pursuing your own ACT values, whatever they > > > > > > > may be and without regard to what anyone else says. Especially me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was just relating my own experience in hope that it might be helpful to > > > > > > > someone on the list in choosing practical, workable values. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apologies if I offended anyone else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards to all, > > > > > > > Tom Hardy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >>

[Guest guest]

The reason I thought you had a first question is because you said "Another question I have is ... "As I said in an earlier post, I don't associate the word "value" with bad behavior. So for something unsavory to be considered a valid value does not resonate for me. That is a lack of values, IMO. Again, to me, value means worth. If someone finds cruelty worthwhile, then he is someone who lacks values rather than someone who holds negative values, which is a contradiction in terms.

Helena

Re: My Philosophy

The first question is not a question at all is fact a statement (sorry my bad) but interesting to hear your answer to the question. > > > > > > > > > > > > Soozy, > > > > > > > > > > > > I applaud you in choosing and pursuing your own ACT values, whatever they > > > > > > may be and without regard to what anyone else says. Especially me. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was just relating my own experience in hope that it might be helpful to > > > > > > someone on the list in choosing practical, workable values. > > > > > > > > > > > > Apologies if I offended anyone else. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards to all, > > > > > > Tom Hardy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

 

If someone finds cruelty worthwhile, then he is someone who lacks values rather than someone who holds negative values, which is a contradiction in terms.

Hi Helena and folks,Here are two of the commonly accepted definitions of values:10. Sociology . the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These values may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.

11. Ethics . any object or quality desirable as a means or as an end in itself.

It seems to me that this discussion is very individualistic and relativistic about values. You have your values and I have mine. Yet not all values are equal. What does ACT say about a set of universal human values?

Best regards,Rothwell Polk  

[Guest guest]

>

> It seems to me that this discussion is very individualistic

> and relativistic about values. You have your values and I

> have mine. Yet not all values are equal. What does ACT say

> about a set of universal human values?

Um, just to clarify what I wrote earlier - and not in response

just to this post but to all our posts in this thread:

We can of course debate " values " in the sense that the word

is used one way or another, in this culture or that. E.g.

values, virtues, mores, ethics, etc. This is all fine and has its place, e.g. it

can be useful to discuss what is ethical behavior

in a particular situation.

However ... to repeat ... ACT is using the word " values " in

a very particular sense, strictly in the confines of ACT and

not outside those confines. It might almost be more helpful

if ACT books used a made-up word in place of " values " so that

confusion did not arise. Say " zubba " , as in " I zubba X " or

" I am zubbaing in service of X. "

Check out the values section of " Get Out of Your Mind " or

of " Things Might Go Terribly, Horribly Wrong " to get a feel

for the difference.

- Randy

[Guest guest]

I agree, Randy, which is why I bowed out of the discussion because I thought I was getting caught up in words about values in general, not about values in terms of ACT-- although, I should have bowed out earlier. When I try to answer questions other have, I sometimes lose focus because I try to see the question through their eyes. Thanks for jumping in with your usual clarity!

Helena

Re: My Philosophy

>> It seems to me that this discussion is very individualistic > and relativistic about values. You have your values and I > have mine. Yet not all values are equal. What does ACT say > about a set of universal human values?Um, just to clarify what I wrote earlier - and not in responsejust to this post but to all our posts in this thread:We can of course debate "values" in the sense that the word is used one way or another, in this culture or that. E.g. values, virtues, mores, ethics, etc. This is all fine and has its place, e.g. it can be useful to discuss what is ethical behavior in a particular situation. However ... to repeat ... ACT is using the word "values" ina very particular sense, strictly in the confines of ACT andnot outside those confines. It might almost be more helpfulif ACT books used a made-up word in place of "values" so thatconfusion did not arise. Say "zubba", as in "I zubba X" or"I am zubbaing in service of X." Check out the values section of "Get Out of Your Mind" orof "Things Might Go Terribly, Horribly Wrong" to get a feelfor the difference. - Randy

[Guest guest]

What does ACT say about a set of universal human values?

There is no such thing as "universal human values" in ACT. And dictionary definitions do not define values in ACT terms. I'm not sure what point you are making ... or perhaps I made it.Helena

Re: Re: My Philosophy

If someone finds cruelty worthwhile, then he is someone who lacks values rather than someone who holds negative values, which is a contradiction in terms.

Hi Helena and folks,Here are two of the commonly accepted definitions of values:

10. Sociology . the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These values may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy.

11. Ethics . any object or quality desirable as a means or as an end in itself.It seems to me that this discussion is very individualistic and relativistic about values. You have your values and I have mine. Yet not all values are equal. What does ACT say about a set of universal human values?Best regards,Rothwell Polk

[Guest guest]

Maybe there universal rules to guide conduct in a basic way so that individuals may have opportunities to share and express their values freely and without defense Sent from my iPhone What does ACT say about a set of universal human values?There is no such thing as "universal human values" in ACT. And dictionary definitions do not define values in ACT terms. I'm not sure what point you are making ... or perhaps I made it.Helena Re: Re: My Philosophy If someone finds cruelty worthwhile, then he is someone who lacks values rather than someone who holds negative values, which is a contradiction in terms.Hi Helena and folks,Here are two of the commonly accepted definitions of values:10. Sociology . the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society toward which the people of the group have an affective regard. These values may be positive, as cleanliness, freedom, or education, or negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy. 11. Ethics . any object or quality desirable as a means or as an end in itself.It seems to me that this discussion i!s very individualistic and relativistic about values. You have your values and I have mine. Yet not all values are equal. What does ACT say about a set of universal human values?Best regards,Rothwell Polk

[Guest guest]

> >

> > It seems to me that this discussion is very individualistic

> > and relativistic about values. You have your values and I

> > have mine. Yet not all values are equal. What does ACT say

> > about a set of universal human values?

>

> Um, just to clarify what I wrote earlier - and not in response

> just to this post but to all our posts in this thread:

>

> We can of course debate " values " in the sense that the word

> is used one way or another, in this culture or that. E.g.

> values, virtues, mores, ethics, etc. This is all fine and has its place, e.g.

it can be useful to discuss what is ethical behavior

> in a particular situation.

>

> However ... to repeat ... ACT is using the word " values " in

> a very particular sense, strictly in the confines of ACT and

> not outside those confines. It might almost be more helpful

> if ACT books used a made-up word in place of " values " so that

> confusion did not arise. Say " zubba " , as in " I zubba X " or

> " I am zubbaing in service of X. "

>

> Check out the values section of " Get Out of Your Mind " or

> of " Things Might Go Terribly, Horribly Wrong " to get a feel

> for the difference.

>

> - Randy

Oh the (malevolent?) power of language! I think zubbaing sounds quite disgusting

<VBG>

I do see that values has to be about doing by the way. Actually that is exactly

where the problem lies for me. One of my values is valuing others and the

problem arises not so much as a philosophical debate for me but in very

difficult decisions that have to be made when associating with others.

If I contemplate sticking up for my values and know this may make me unpopular

my very next thought seems to be people will think me

arrogant/self-centred/blind to their needs and then the next one is how do I

know I am not? Maybe I am being subjective, failing to be empathic and see

things from others' points of view and from there I think Dang there goes

another value! I am not managing to act " in the service of " ...honesty,

sincerity, empathy.

S.

[Guest guest]

Under the ACT view of values - with values being naturally nuetral - I'd see a

bully as someone who highly valued " control " and " power. "

I think the concept of values as only positive beliefs stems from religious

language that leads people to think that you need to be a Christian to have

values. As a Unitarian Universalist Athiest, I've endured many attacks of being

value less and of not teaching my child values and morals. That simply isn't

true. UUs have strong shared values, what we don't have is dogma or blind

obediance to someone's uniform code.

B.

>

> I think the word " value " implies something good and desirable, something of

worth.  So if someone lives an immoral or unethical life, then I would say they

have no values, or very few values.  Bullying, to me, would indicate a lack of

values rather than a " negative value. "   I don't know if I'm right about this

definition, but it helps me to see it that way. 

>

[Guest guest]

I agree Randy. I think the other distraction is that people are mixing up values

with behaviors.

Using the ongoing bully example.

Many different people value " control. " And they behave in many different ways to

support that value.

Some may bully others in an attempt to feel in control. Others may internalize

and not connect with others to feel in control. Some may want to work in

management so they can feel in control. Others may want a rote, routine widget

type of job to feel in control.

My 2 cents...

Barbara S.

> However ... to repeat ... ACT is using the word " values " in

> a very particular sense, strictly in the confines of ACT and

> not outside those confines. It might almost be more helpful

> if ACT books used a made-up word in place of " values " so that

> confusion did not arise. Say " zubba " , as in " I zubba X " or

> " I am zubbaing in service of X. "

>