VALUES
Values
are the link between events and our basic emotions. They are converters which
convert events into matters about which we can feel strongly. Values are the
most important ingredient in civilization. It is by means of values that
civilization turns selfish, greedy, aggressive, short-term behaviour into
social cooperation which makes life better for everyone and cares for the weak.
The astonishing power of values to reverse normal human feelings is shown by
Christianity. Martyrs suffered pain and willingly gave up their lives for the
greater glory of God. Suffering itself had a value. Enemies were to be loved.
Compassion was to be shown to the poor. In all these cases the value system
succeeded in converting one lot of emotions into another.
Me-values: ego, status, self-importance,
achievement, survival pleasure, self-indulgence, etc.
Mates-values: being accepted by the group,
belonging to the group, acting as a member of the group, accepting the values
of the group, not letting the group down.
Moral-values: religious values, social custom,
general observance of the law, upbringing values, general values of a
particular culture (often regarded as absolute but varying much from culture to
culture).
Mankind-values: (relatively new) ecology, pollution,
concern with nuclear power, a general concern for the whole earth and mankind
upon it, also human rights and a concern for basic human values that transcend
cultures.
HV and LV
It
is a useful attention-directing technique to attempt to divide the values
occurring in any situation into 'High Values' and 'Low Values'. This is one of
the CoRT lessons. In general, the high values are the ones which determine action,
and the low values are the ones which have to be taken into account. Imagine a
cost squeeze in an industrial company. There is to be a reduction in staff. The
head of one division is being pressured to get rid of an assistant who has been
with him for fifteen years. What are the values involved? This could read as
follows:
HV: fear that he, the division head,
could lose his own job if he did not comply; fear of the company collapsing;
fear that he would not get promotion; loyalty to his assistant; the ego need to
be successful and to be seen to be successful.
LV: the awkwardness of sacking the man;
fear of what people might say dislike of his own boss; the cost of
compensation; the effect on other workers.
The
exercise is a difficult one. For example, in the above situation loyalty to his
subordinate might have been classed as either a low or high value. It might he
valued highly but, in the work, context would easily be over-ridden by other
values, since 'efficiency' would be seen to be the value in that context.
In fact,
the exercise is based on the 'apple-sorting' story. A French farmer goes off to
market in the morning. He asks his two sons to sort a huge pile of apples into
big apples and small apples while he is gone. They work all day to do this,
carefully assessing whether a particular apple is big or small. The farmer
returns and mixes both piles of apples together again. The sons are furious at
having wasted their time.
But
the farmer points out that the real object of the exercise was to get 'full
attention' paid to the apples that the bad ones would be thrown out - as indeed
they have been. The 'big versus small' discrimination requires much more
careful scrutiny than just looking for the bad apples. So, the HV and L V
exercise is really an instruction to look very carefully at the values involved
in any situation.
Teacher has forbidden
the eating of sweets in class. A boy notices that his neighbour is eating
sweets - should he sneak on him?
1. What if there is a broken window and
the boy knows the culprit?
2. What if there has been a lot of
stealing and the boy knows who the thief is?
3. What if it is a police state and your
neighbour is giving refuge to a dissident wanted by the police?
4. What if there is hunger in the
country and your neighbour is hoarding food?
5. What if you are informing on a
terrorist gang?
6. What if you are a member of a gang
and inform on them?
7. What if you are a paid police
informer?
8. What if you secretly and anonymously
tell tales on your friends to gossip columnists?
It
is most interesting to see how, in a roomful of people, the process of
'sneaking or informing' becomes respectable at one moment and shameful at
another.
This
is a very sensitive example of the clash of values. It is also a good example
of the importance of context and hypocrisy. If we dislike another regime
(probably justifiably), then any sort of sneaking in that regime is abhorrent.
If it is our own society then there are times when informing is not only
respectable but a social duty. Similarly, we would not like the idea of people
sneaking on their friends, especially if we are involved, but at the same time
we enjoy reading the results of that sneaking. The situation is an interesting
one because of the constant clash between me-values, mates-values and
moral-values.
In
each of the following situations, what would you regard as the High Value (HV)
and the Low Value (LV)?
1. Taking on a new teacher.
2. Giving foreign aid to a poor country.
3. Choosing a career.
4. Choosing a site for a restaurant.
5. Laying off workers in a recession.
6. Choosing players for a team.
VALUE - LADEN WORDS
The
very words 'sneak' and 'informer' carry a heavy negative value. A great number
of the words we use have such values.
I
would go so far as to say that more than three-quarters of our public thinking
is no more than an attempt to drag in value-laden words as soon as we possibly
can. And then to rest the argument on those words.
If
you read the average newspaper editorial or listen to the average political
speech you may find that it is no more than a thin net of rational argument
supporting a heavy burden of value-laden words.
There
are the 'goodie' words such as: moral debt,
justice, honour, fair play, freedom, press freedom, consistency, human rights,
sincere, direct, perceptive, etc.
Then
there are the 'baddie' words, which are much more numerous: obstinate, stubborn, sly, cunning, clever, deceitful,
wellmeaning, misguided, egotist, manipulative, self-seeking, publicity
seeking, popularizer, superficial, capitalist, socialist, small-minded, shifty
etc.
These
are quite apart from the directly negative words like 'foolish' or
'incompetent' which are honest judgements. The danger is much more with the
sneer words which slip by and yet carry their value with them. A good example
is the phrase 'wellintentioned' which sounds positive but is used in a
negative way.
The following passage is taken from a
piece which describes the value of the charismatic movement to the development
of Christianity:
'The openness of Christianity to
development and growth has maintained a creative tension that keeps faith
lively.'
The words 'openness', 'development',
'growth', 'creative' and 'lively' are all value-laden words with an upbeat
effect.
In
California I once had a discussion with a psychologist in which I was taking a
provocative position by asserting that the whole post-Freudian emphasis on
digging deeper to find the 'true self and the 'real cause of behaviour' might
be going in the wrong direction.
I
was suggesting that perhaps it was the surface personality that mattered, the
mask which a person constructed for himself or herself to wear to face the
world. The interesting thing was that the discussion was almost impossible
because all the words I used had an intrinsic negative value: surface, superficial, mask, constructed, veneer. All the words he used had an in-built positive
value: true self, underlying nature, real self,
deep truth, mainspring of action, and hidden causes. This is because we have assigned these values
from within the Freudian idiom itself (so used are we to it).
Exactly
the same thing happens if you try to discuss placing an employee in a position
where he will not only be happy but will do his best work. All the words you
use will end up sounding like 'manipulation' which, rightly, has a negative
content. Even if you let the employee do his own choosing or even designing his
own job the connotation is that you are doing it for your good, not his, and
therefore it is manipulation.
It
is frightening to see how many subjects cannot be discussed because the very
words we need to use have been so contaminated with in-built values that
whatever we say is pre-judged. If you try to explain something complex in a
simple way you are a 'popularizer', which is a most convenient, all-embracing
sneer word.
As
an exercise it is useful to go through a political speech or newspaper
editorial (or even better newspaper letters) and circle with a marker all the
value-laden words that are used. The end result surprises most people.
Amongst
the value-laden words should also be mentioned those words which have the special
value of sounding important and saying very little: 'concerned
about', 'pay attention to this', 'have at heart', ' will look into', 'some
progress'. They are mainly
political words which are used to say a lot when no real promise or commitment
can be made.
- Extracted in true text from the Book; “Thinking Course” by De Bono
T. Mallikarjuna Prasad
Trainer | Facilitator | Consultant
Department of Personnel & Training
Government of India
