4 hours ago, Eiuol said:
So we can talk about values on the one hand as the general psychological phenomena, and we can also talk about values according to the Objectivist standard and deny that something is of value.
Even if we are talking about values generally, they are not psychological phenomena. They can be anything you act to gain or keep, which includes everything from your mother’s milk as a child to your memories as an old man with Alzheimer’s. They can be physical or mental in nature. They can be unchosen or chosen, automatically or volitionally pursued. The value qua value is not the concept in your head, but that thing which you want to get or maintain. Does that make sense?
Again, here I’m describing the widest idea of value, not the narrower, Objectivist-specific one. Previously I was speaking from my view of the Objectivist ethics.