Jump to content

Valuable Philosophical Q


ender4
 Share

Valued or valuable?  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. Valued or valuable?

    • Valuable cos we value them
      16
    • Valued because they are valuable
      5


Recommended Posts

  • Moderator

It depends what you want from them. If you want to sell them then they are valuable because of what you will get for them. But if you do not want to sell them then they are valuable because you value them. If you are not looking to get rid of something then the only value it CAN have to you is what you get from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think of it in 2 terms...both for me came out as the same answer...

1. Money...a tenner is only valuable because WE say it has a value...in essense all money is either a commonly found metal or a special kind of paper (dunno exactly) but in terms of the value of its materials and the cost to produce i bet they actually physically cost next to nothing.

2. Sentimental items...they mean nothing to anyone else but mean something to you...i have old photos of my dog who died when i was younger for example and other crap along the same lines like we all do which means absolutely bugger all to any of you guys but to me its priceless.

so to me things are only valuable because we value them but i guess this is one of those things where everyone has an opinion and noones is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, some things a valuable because I value them personally. Other things I don't value personally are valuable because of what they can be traded for. For example, for me money has no value (personally) but money is valuable because of what I can trade it for, ie things I do value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

Things are valuable based on the expected value of the benefits thrown off (allowing for discounting of future benefit to the present). The determination of the expected value and of the benefits is entirely subjective.

Mind you, price is but a proxy for a consensus valuation, the sum of subjectivities as it were... accordingly, price does not equal value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the things that are valuable, valuable because we value them or do we value them because they are valuable?

To split this in to two questions:

The first: Are things valuable because we value them?

The second: Do we value things because they are valuable?

The two are not mutually exclusive and the answers depend upon the semantics.

If we regard the verb ‘value’ and adjective ‘valuable’ in terms of assigning a monetary worth to something then we are talking about an objective measure of value of that thing.

If we speak of ‘value’ in terms of the desire or need to possess or obtain something and ‘valuable’ in terms of the enjoyment, pleasure or satisfaction of the thing itself (or the actual attainment of the thing as the successful fruition of a course of action to obtain it) or in terms of the lack of the negative impact of not obtaining the thing, we are then looking at a subjective measure of value of that thing.

If we regard the terms ‘value’ and ‘valuable’ either as objective or subjective consistently for both questions, then:

If both are objective measures, it is necessarily so that the answer to the first is yes and to the second is no - for without value there would be nothing valuable.

If both are subjective measures, then both are necessarily true.

If valuable is the objective measure and value the subjective then the first is necessarily so and the second is quite likely but dependent upon the subject whose subjective measure is in question.

If valuable is the subjective measure and value the objective then the reverse of the previous position is the case, i.e. the first is quite likely but dependent upon the subject whose subjective measure is in question and the second is necessarily so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Value" is an entirely human construct. Hence no. 1.

agree entirely Mike.

So do I. I think.

Is grass not valuable to cows then?

why would it be? Cows don't smoke ..... :lol: :winkold:

on the flip side, i'd say no, Grant.

I'd say it was essential to their existence. Not "valuable", as it has no actual "value" as such.

Needed/required, rather than valuable, would be my take on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is grass not valuable to cows then?

why would it be? Cows don't smoke ..... :lol: :winkold:

on the flip side, i'd say no, Grant.

I'd say it was essential to their existence. Not "valuable", as it has no actual "value" as such.

Needed/required, rather than valuable, would be my take on it.

I think you are being very narrow in your definition of value, Jon.

Why does food not have value to an animal?

Does food have a value to a human? Other than pounds, shillings and pence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â