On Tue, 25 Jun Robert Bacal wrote -
> On 24 Jun 96 at 13:28, jpomo@gate.net wrote:
> > Specifically, a "value" is how we do things or
> > accomplish our goals as in how honestly, cooperatively, safely,
> > respectfully, humbly, knowledgeably, enthusiastically, fairly,
> > forthrightly, compassionately and the like.
>
> Your definition is interesting (a value is how we do things). I
> understand that you BELIEVE that there are universal values held by
> everyone, so it is quite a bit easier to define value as related to
> the 10 or 15 universals you postulate, (but never document with
> evidence). But, it's funny, but I would call how we do things
> something different...let's say, our actions. So, we are still stuck
> with the potential for semantic problem. Are actions the same as
> values?
Driving a car is an action. Coaching a junior is an action. Discussing an
issue is an action. How one goes about it reflects standards for one or
more values such as respect/disrespect or enthusiasm/negativism. Actions
are not the same as values, but they may reflect values. What do you
think?
> > I do not believe that values conflict, only that they appear to
> > conflict because of lack of understanding.
>
> Having seen you suggest this before, I will state categorically that
> it offends me. It suggests that if only others would come to the
> light, they would be relieved of the tedium of their everyday
> experiences regarding real life conflicts regarding values. This
> approach seems to be an attempt to disconfirm and demean the
> experiences of others--my experiences then of values conflict are
> apparently illusory. Perhaps reading the book you speak of would cure
> me of my misunderstanding, but perhaps I might be too stupid to have
> the veil lifted.
I did not mean to offend you, but I still contend that what we believe to
be conflicts are only misunderstandings. Many people are very comfortable
with conflicts and accept them as part of the human condition. I suffered
from those conflicts for years before I was able to dispose of them.
> Many people act dishonestly to sell products...let's say books. Why
> do they do that? Let's assume they value eating, and they profess to
> value honesty? They believe that if they lie about the product, or
> their relationship to it, and pretend to be an independent source of
> information, they shall eat better and feed their children. Two
> values; two apparently competing values. I would be interested in
> hearing how you see that there is no conflict of values in this
> scenario?
I am sure that you have picked a case in which you have considerable
experience and have probably done the research you ask of others. I would
like to know what research you have done on this subject and why you
believe there to be a conflict of values. Please provide the values you
are considering. I assume that honesty is one of the values. I will be
interested to find out what data you have which proves that dishonesty is
the best way to provide for the health or welfare of the person involved
and their loved ones. Do you consider food to be a value or is it the
action of eating which is a value?
Regards, Joan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joan Pomo The Finest Tools for Managing People
Simonton Associates Based on the book
jpomo@gate.net "How to Unleash the Power of People"
--"jpomo@gate.net" <jpomo@gate.net>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>