The Meaning of Values

Like ‘development’, ‘values’ is another slippery term that defies absolute definition. We might be able to describe what we mean, but this meaning is selective, depending on our ‘value position’ (Plant, 1974:12). A value is not an objective empirically observable entity, but something intrinsic to an ideology, a belief or an attitude. As such, the word ‘value’ is something to be contested and open to different interpretations.

The Oxford English Reference Dictionary (1996) offers a range of interpretations. The first five meanings of ‘value’ cited connote the utility of a thing, as in the price we pay in a market exchange – essentially an economic interpretation of the word. Meanings 6 and 7 refer to ‘serving a purpose’, and to ‘one’s principles or standards’. Definitions 8-13 relate to music, the quality of sound, mathematics, relative rank

Chapter 3 – The Architecture of Values -28-

(as in playing cards or a chess game), the quality of light in a painting, and to numerical measures of magnitude in physics or chemistry. ‘Value’ is indeed a complex word!

For present purposes the primary interest is in the interpretation of ‘principles and standards’. Pattison notes that the use of values in a moral context has arisen only in the last 30 years18

Domain Source

, and describes value concepts as follows:

The concepts are … thoroughly post-modern, appearing to refer to some tangible external reality. … [A]t best they are only partially referential. Gold is only valuable to those who value gold – and those who value gold may do so for many different reasons. The metal, being itself inanimate and an object, does not require people to value it (2004:2).

Pattison goes on to describe how moral values are intrinsic to human assumptions, beliefs and attitudes. He points out that just as gold has been used to underwrite the (Northern) economic order so does our utilisation of values lend support to existing moral and social orders. Table 3.1 summarises Pattison’s various interpretations of the meaning of values, showing the different meanings adopted by different disciplines.

Table 3.1: Synonyms for Values Synonyms for Values

Economics Preferences, Choices, Desires

Psychology Attitudes and Beliefs

Sociology Norms, Assumptions, Expectations,

Judgements and Prejudices Management, Manufacturing Standards, Visions, Goals

Ethics Morals, Principles, Commitment

Adapted from Pattison, 2004:3-5 It is useful at this point to separate what we mean by ‘values’ from ‘ethics’ and ‘morals’, though the terms are often used interchangeably.19

18 _{Coinciding with the rise of postmodernism, the shift from positivist and instrumental}

thought, and the ‘rediscovery of value’, as surveyed by Soper (1993) and Connor (1993) .

19 _{Engel (1990) notes that ‘ethics’ and ‘morality’ are interchangeable in ordinary language.}

Gasper (2004:19) points out that ‘ethics’ has a Greek origin, and ‘moral’ derives from Latin, implying there is a common meaning. However, Saenz (2005) argues this is a superficial distinction; he would also like to see development ethics including analysis of the analysts to better understand their own ‘situated selves’.

For Pattison “morals are precepts and habits oriented towards attaining what is good and desirable”

Chapter 3 – The Architecture of Values -29-

(2004:4), indicating that we demonstrate moral principles and values in behaviour (and, it should be said, in political and economic policies for development). A better distinction is found in Engel:

‘[M]orality’ most properly refers to judgements and actions regarding what is right or good, and ‘ethics’ to the reasoning such judgements and actions require (1990:2, emphasis added).

Gasper’s definition of ethics expands on Engel’s position. He notes ethics (1) is a set of “substantive beliefs about what is good or bad or right or wrong”, (2) “refer to theories and principles”, and (3) “is also a field of study” which can be descriptive, prescriptive or methodological (2004:18-19). Thus ethics lend justification and legitimacy to moral positions which are often vague and contradictory, though what is ‘right’ and ‘good’ is left open to what is valued as such. In development terms, as elaborated in Chapter 2, there is a distinct contrast between the values of economic growth and the advancement of human well-being.

Smith & Duffy (2003) take a slightly different approach in exploring the ethics of development tourism. Their primary interest is in the interaction between ethical (moral), aesthetic and economic values, while acknowledging there are other fields like epistemological and religious values.20 _{They note the dominance of religious}

and ethical values in pre-modern societies and the primacy given to economic values in modern times, effectively marginalising other ethical values – for example those inherent in the humanist paradigm21

Padaki (2000) offers a more basic definition of ‘values’, centred on beliefs, attitudes and behaviours. ‘Beliefs’ represent cognitive organisation arranged on a centre- periphery continuum. ‘Attitude’ indicates an affective association with a belief, and can represent a cluster of beliefs, while ‘values’ represent an organisation of attitudes. Thus, “a ‘value system’ is a cluster of values, often interrelated, that governs the characteristic thinking-feeling-behaviour pattern of a person” (Padaki, 2000:422, emphasis added). Identifying the relationship between values and

.

20 _{See also Rokeach (1973:24) re Allport-Vernon Test: value content groupings include}

theoretical, economic, aesthetic, social, political and religious beliefs. Rokeach also notes these groupings could be culture-bound.

21 _{Fowler claims that economic development is amoral (2005); and in Gasper’s analysis}

Chapter 3 – The Architecture of Values -30-

behaviour is helpful, suggesting some prospect for the empirical evidence of values to be found in behaviour.

O’Leary adopts a similar approach:

A value can be defined as an ongoing belief that a specific way of acting or being is preferable to an alternative way of acting or being. A set of values forms a value system, which is an ongoing arrangement of beliefs about what is preferable and important about ways of acting and being (2006a:1).

Yet this attempt to find a substantive meaning for values becomes a road to nowhere. At best we can appreciate that values are created by humans, giving meaning to actions, experiences and attitudes, and to behaviour. There is some comfort in the following statements:

Just as we breathe air and cannot see or describe it in any very nuanced way, we mostly breathe values and meanings, assuming them, rather than interrogating their nature (Pattison, 2004:6).

Ethical values are not quantifiable, they are not exchangeable in the way that giving them a monetary equivalence would imply, and … they are not just personal preferences (Smith & Duffy, 2003:27, original emphasis).

The relation of values to development is highlighted by claims of the International Development Ethics Association (IDEA, 2005). IDEA argues that value issues are at the heart of the development discourse and development thinking; that values form a basic justification and rationalisation of development models and theories; and that values make primary contributions to decision-making for both donor organisations and aid recipient groups or communities. In other words, values are foundational issues in development theory and practice.