This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2009)

In ethics, value is a property of objects, including physical objects as well as abstract objects (e.g. actions), representing their degree of importance.

Ethic value denotes something's degree of importance, with the aim of determining what action or life is best to do or live (Deontology), or at least attempt to describe the value of different actions (Axiology). It may be described as treating actions themselves as abstract objects, putting value to them. It deals with right conduct and good life, in the sense that a highly, or at least relatively highly, valuable action may be regarded as ethically "good" (adjective sense), and an action of low, or at least relatively low, value may be regarded as "bad".

What makes an action valuable may in turn depend on the ethic values of the objects it increases, decreases or alters. An object with "ethic value" may be termed an "ethic or philosophic good" (noun sense).

Study[link]

• Ethical value may be regarded as a study under ethics, which, in turn, may be grouped as philosophy. Similar to that ethics may be regarded as a subfield of philosophy, ethical value may be regarded as a subgroup of the more broad (and vague) philosophic value. Ethical value denotes something's degree importance, with the aim of determining what action or life is best to do, or at least attempt to describe the value of different actions. It may be described as treating actions themselves as abstract objects, putting value to them. It deals with right conduct and good life, in the sense that a highly, or at least relatively highly, valuable action or may be regarded as good, and an action of low, or at least relatively low, value may be regarded as bad.
• The study of ethical value is also included in value theory.

Similar concepts[link]

Ethical value is sometimes used synonymously with goodness. However, goodness has many other meanings as well, and may be regarded as more ambiguous.

Absolute and relative[link]

There is a distinction between relative (or personal or cultural value) and absolute (or noumenal) value (not to be confused with mathematical absolute value). Relative value is subjective, depending on individual and cultural views, and is therefore synonymous with personal and cultural value. Absolute value, on the other hand, is philosophically absolute and independent of individual and cultural views, as well as independent of whether it is apprehended or not.

Relative value may be regarded as an 'experience' by subjects of the absolute value. Relative value thus varies with individual and cultural interpretation, while absolute value remains constant, regardless of individual or collective 'experience' of it.

Relative value may be explained as an assumption from which implementation can be extrapolated. If it be known, absolute value may be able to be implemented, but as it exists, regardless of whether it be known, its implementation cannot be assumed.

Intrinsic and extrinsic[link]

Philosophic value may be split into instrumental value and intrinsic values. An instrumental value is worth having as a means towards getting something else that is good (e.g., a radio is instrumentally good in order to hear music). An intrinsically valuable thing is worth for itself, not as a means to something else. It is giving value intrinsic and extrinsic properties.

An ethic good with instrumental value may be termed an ethic mean, and an ethic good with intrinsic value may be termed an end-in-itself. An object may be both a mean and end-in-itself.

Whole value[link]

Intrinsic and instrumental goods are not mutually exclusive categories.^[1] Some objects are both good in themselves, and also good for getting other objects that are good. "Understanding science" may be such a good, being both worthwhile in and of itself, and as a means of achieving other goods. In these cases, the sum of instrumental (specifically the all instrumental value) and instrinsic value of an object may be regarded as the whole value of the object.

Intensity[link]

The intensity of philosophic value is the degree it is generated or carried out, and may be regarded as the prevalence of the good, the object having the value. ^[1]

It should not be confused with the amount of value per object, although the latter may vary too, e.g. because of instrumental value conditionality. For instance, for a Waffleist, accepting waffle eating as of end-in-itself, the intensity may be the speed that waffles are eaten, and is zero when no waffles are eaten, e.g. if no waffles are present. Still, each waffle that had been present would still have value, no matter if it was being eaten or not, independent on intensity.

Instrumental value conditionality in this case could be exampled by every waffle not present, making them less valued by being far away rather than easily accessible.

In many life stances it is the product of value and intensity that is ultimately desirable, i.e. not only to generate value, but to generate it in large degree. Maximizing lifestances have the highest possible intensity as an imperative.

Homology in physics[link]

When comparing to the homologous measure in physics, then intensity in physics may not be the best example, but may better be described as its area. In this sense, power in physics may be compared to the amount of value per object, and physical intensity the product of value per object and ethic intensity. If there is no physical area, then no energy is generated, regardless of physical power. In the same way, if there is no ethic intensity, then no total value is generated, regardless of value per object.

Duration[link]

Philosophic or ethic value duration is the time that an object exists, or more specifically, has any intensity.

It is contrasted with chain of events duration, which is the time it takes for a chain of events to reach its terminal event, in this case the object with intrinsic value.

The chain of events duration may be significantly longer than the value duration, especially for objects with long term instrumental value. In the intervening time, the value of the object is converted into the value of the intervening objects in the chain of events.

Average and instantaneous value[link]

With time in mind, there is a distinction between average ethic or philosophic value and instantaneous ethic or philosophic value.

• The average ethic or philosophic value is the average of the ethic or philosophic value of an object during a certain amount of time. If not else specified it is assumed to be the value duration of the object in mind. It can, however, also be the chain of events duration or other specified amount of time.
• The instantaneous ethic or philosophic value is the ethic or philosophic value of an object at a certain point of time. If may be a present, past or future point of time.

Total value[link]

The total ethic or philosophic value of an object is the product of its average value, average intensity and value duration. It may be either absolute or relative or both.

Any decrease in the whole value, intensity or duration of an object decreases its total value and vice versa. For instance, for a Waffleist, regarding waffles as of ends-in-themselves, it still doesn't generate any total value if there are no waffles, no intensity, no matter how much average value a waffle has.

Total whole value[link]

The total value of the whole value of an object is its total whole value.

Alternatively described, it is the sum of the total intrinsic value and total instrumental value.

It may be either relative or absolute, or both.

Economic and philosophic value[link]

Philosophical value is distinguished from economic value, since it is independent on some other desired condition or commodity. The economic value of an object may rise when the exchangeable desired condition or commodity, e.g. money, become high in supply, and vice versa when supply of money becomes low.

Nevertheless, economic value may be regarded as a result of philosophical value. In the subjective theory of value, the personal philosophic value a person puts in possessing something is reflected in what economic value this person puts on it. The limit where a person considers to purchase something may be regarded as the point where the personal philosophic value of possessing something exceeds the personal philosophic value of what is given up in exchange for it, e.g. money. In this light, everything can be said to have a "personal economic value" in contrast to its "societal economic value."

Equality[link]

Philosophic or ethic value equality is the concept of two objects having the same philosophic value. It can be of different types, depending of the value:

• Philosophic or ethic intrinsic value equality, where the objects have the same intrinsic value
• Philosophic or ethic instrumental value equality, where the objects have the same instrumental value
• Philosophic or ethic whole value equality, where the objects have the same whole value
• Philosophic or ethic total value equality, where the objects have the same total value

Value system[link]

A value system is a set of consistent ethic values and measures used for the purpose of ethical or ideological integrity. A well defined value system is a moral code.

Positive and negative value[link]

There may be a distinction between positive and negative philosophic or ethic value. While positive ethic value generally correlates with something that is pursued or maximized, negative ethic value correlates with something that is avoided or minimized.

Negative value may be both intrinsic negative value and/or instrumental negative value.

See also[link]

• Importance
• Meaning of life
• Purpose in life
• Intrinsic value (ethics)
• Instrumental value

References[link]

• Research on Values, Counter Values, Education and Value Education

Further Reading[link]

• Barry, W.J. (2012). Challenging the Status Quo Meaning of Educational Quality: Introducing Transformational Quality (TQ) Theory©. Educational Journal of Living Theories. 4, 1-29. http://ejolts.net/node/191

External links[link]

• Value Based Theory of Educational Quality
• Value (ethics) Based Action Research Approach
• Value (ethics) Based Learning Experience of a 10 Year Old Croatian Student

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Value (ethics)

Nigel Warburton (born 1962) is a philosopher, currently Senior Lecturer at the Open University. He is best known as a populariser of philosophy, being author of a number of books of this genre, but he has also written academic works in esthetics and applied ethics.^[1]

Education[link]

Warburton received a BA from the University of Bristol and a PhD from Darwin College, Cambridge and was a lecturer at the University of Nottingham before joining the Department of Philosophy at the Open University in 1994.^[2]

Career[link]

He is author of a number of introductory Philosophy books including the bestselling Philosophy: The Basics (4th ed.), Philosophy: The Classics (3rd ed.) and Thinking from A to Z (3rd ed.), Philosophy: The Essential Study Guide, and The Art Question; he also edited Philosophy: Basic Readings, second edition and is co-author of Reading Political Philosophy: Machiavelli to Mill. He has written extensively about photography, particularly about Bill Brandt, and wrote a biography of the modernist architect Ernö Goldfinger.^[3] He regularly teaches courses on philosophy and art at Tate Modern and writes a monthly column 'Everyday Philosophy' for "Prospect" magazine.

He runs a philosophy weblog Virtual Philosopher^[4] and with David Edmonds regularly podcasts interviews with top philosophers on a range of subjects at Philosophy Bites.^[5] He also podcasts chapters from his book Philosophy: The Classics.^[6]

Partial bibliography[link]

• Philosophy: The Basics (4th ed.) ISBN 978-0-415-32773-2
• Philosophy: The Classics (3rd ed.) ISBN 978-0-415-35629-9
• Thinking from A to Z (3rd ed.) ISBN 978-0-415-43371-6
• The Art Question
• Ernö Goldfinger: The Life of An Architect
• Free Speech: A Very Short Introduction ISBN 978-0-19-923235-2
• "Philosophy Bites" (co-edited with David Edmonds) ISBN 978-0-19-957632-6

References[link]

1. ^ Julian Baggini and Jeremy Stangroom (eds) New British Philosophy, Routledge 2002, ISBN 0-415-24346-7, p. 272
2. ^ "Faculty of Arts: Department of Philosophy". Open University. http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/philos/warburton.htm. Retrieved 2007-09-04. 
3. ^ "Nigel Warburton CV at PFD". PFD Group Ltd. Archived from the original on 2007-10-24. http://web.archive.org/web/20071024175008/http://www.pfd.co.uk/clients/warburtn/b-aut.html. Retrieved 2007-09-04. 
4. ^ http://www.virtualphilosopher.org
5. ^ http://www.philosophybites.com
6. ^ http://www.philclassics.libsyn.com

External links[link]

• Official site
• Philosophy Bites podcast
• Ethics Bites podcast
• Virtual Philosopher weblog
• Art and Allusion weblog
• Free Speech weblog
• Interview with Nigel Warburton and David Edmonds about Podcasting on Oxonians Podcast

"Choose the right" is a saying or motto among members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) that is taught to children and used by members of the church as a reminder to act righteously. The phrase is taken from an LDS hymn which has that title.

History[link]

The letters CTR, a reference to this phrase, are incorporated into a shield logo designed by Helen Alldredge,^[1] a Primary General Board member in the 1960s. In 1970, a church committee headed by Naomi W. Randall recommended that the shield be incorporated into official church material. Since then, both the phrase and symbol have been used in religious educational materials for LDS youth of Primary age.^[2] The symbol is also used in LDS culture by members of all ages, both as a reminder of the motto, as well as an indicator of religious affiliation. The CTR initials, displayed on the shield and in other forms, can be seen mainly on CTR rings as well as other types of jewelry, tee shirts, bookmarks and stationery.

According to the US Patent and Trademark Office, the LDS Church's stylized "CTR" abbreviation and shield with the CTR symbol are trademarked for use on finger ring jewelry by Intellectual Reserve.^[3][4] The phrase "Choose the Right," however, is not trademarked in the United States and may be used by anyone for commercial purposes.^{[citation needed]}

CTR ring[link]

A CTR ring, showing the escutcheon design

A ring with the letters "CTR" on is often worn by members of the LDS Church as a reminder of the "Choose the Right" motto, and as a symbol of their religious affiliation.

CTR rings were introduced at the same time as the CTR shield in 1970 by Primary general president LaVern W. Parmley after being recommended by a committee chaired by Naomi W. Randall.^[2] In connection with the children's Sunday School program, each LDS child in this age group is given an adjustable ring with a green escutcheon bearing the letters "CTR" in silver.

Over the years CTR rings have become popular with both children and adults in the LDS Church. They are now available in a variety of designs in over 30 languages.

See also[link]

• Joseph L. Townsend, author of the words for Choose the Right, hymn 239 in the 1985 LDS Hymnal
• Henry A. Tuckett, author of the music for Choose the Right, hymn 239 in the 1985 LDS Hymnal

• Christian ichthys symbol
• Purity ring
• What would Jesus do? (WWJD)

Notes[link]

References[link]

Phrase

• Monson, Thomas S. (November 1994), "Choose You This Day", Ensign, http://www.lds.org/ensign/2004/11/choose-you-this-day?lang=eng 
• Perry, L. Tom (November 1993), "Choose the Right", Ensign, http://www.lds.org/ensign/1993/11/choose-the-right?lang=eng 

Symbol and ring

• Anderson, Vern (May 31, 1997). "CTR ring grows into symbol of LDS culture". Deseret News. (AP). http://www.deseretnews.com/article/563527/CTR-ring-grows-into-symbol-of-LDS-culture.html. 
• Johnston, Jerry (February 10, 2001), "Putting T in CTR was right choice", Deseret News, http://www.deseretnews.com/article/824411/Putting-T-in-CTR-was-right-choice.html 
• McCloud, Susan Evans (July 14, 2010), "Fads, facts and fiction of CTR rings", Deseret News, http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705385084/Susan-Evans-McCloud-Fads-facts-and-fiction-of-CTR-rings.html 
• Ravitz, Jessica (November 4, 2006), "A familiar ring: Choose The Right rings adorn the fingers of kids the world over - but the history of the famous Mormon symbol is a little fuzzy", The Salt Lake Tribune, http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=4596390&itype=NGPSID 
• "Creator of CTR ring dies at 91", Deseret News, July 10, 2008, http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700242122/-Creator-of-CTR-ring-dies-at-91.html 
• "Mormon children's rings big hit with all ages". Telegraph Herald. (AP): p. 10B. July 12, 1997. http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=DZVSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=h80MAAAAIBAJ&pg=2774,2490226. 

External links[link]

Look up CTR in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

• Media related to CTR rings at Wikimedia Commons
• "239: Choose the Right" - wording to hymn as found in the Hymns of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (1985)
• "CTR Ring Varieties" - a large variety of CTR Rings available from Deseret Book bookstores.