The
British-based organization Common
Cause provides an excellent, formal discussion of current
research into world values, and how it relates to issues of social
and environmental health. By comparison, I have tended to be pretty
loose in my treatment of the subject of values, citing specific
applications interchangeably with their deeper motivations. For
example, my valuing the maximum amount and thriving of life over time
and space is a special consequence of action based upon the formal
"self-transcendence" group of values; it is also closely
related to what I have been calling "global responsibility."
Not surprisingly, the opposite group of formal values,
"self-enhancement," corresponds to maximizing personal
"happiness" and meeting "personal responsibility."
There are two other, opposing formal groups of values, "openness
to change" and "conservation," which in my world-view
are more aligned with the "openness" dimension of
personality that prefers certain "environments" over others
(in this case, dynamic vs. static). As Common Cause points out, we
all have these values to varying degrees that depend on specific
situations, but we also have preferences (much like we have preferred
personalities) which will make us more or less inclined to change our
circumstances.
In
the context of creating a healthier world that approaches the ideal,
where humanity doesn't suffer major population loss and it gives
other species more power so they can reduce the threat of
uninhabitability, self-enhancement and conservation can no longer be
dominant. More variability in the environment is inescapable whether
or not we pursue this course, since a significant amount of climate
change is already locked in, so those of us who prefer change will
tend to benefit more than those who don't. If we choose to let
pursuit of personal power dominate, conditions will only get
worse; because people with power will benefit from further limits on
resources and therefore promote more, until they can't, and we will all
fight to the death for the remaining scraps.
The requisite change in dominant values can occur voluntarily or not. In my concept of an ideal world, the change is voluntary, proceeding from a fact-based civil discussion of what our dominant values will be and the preferred consequences of living by those values. Reality is likely to be a lot messier, even if we do readjust our values in time to avoid calamity, which I consider a long shot worth taking.
The requisite change in dominant values can occur voluntarily or not. In my concept of an ideal world, the change is voluntary, proceeding from a fact-based civil discussion of what our dominant values will be and the preferred consequences of living by those values. Reality is likely to be a lot messier, even if we do readjust our values in time to avoid calamity, which I consider a long shot worth taking.
No comments:
Post a Comment