What would be the mission statement or motto of your life? What are you going to work on over the next few days to help you feel more comfortable being yourself? What kind of person do you want to be five years down the road?
Which values are good and which bad, if any? Which values are to be tolerated even if their rightness is controversial? Has one a right to express and teach values?
Can any science or doctrine be neutral with regard to values? These are key issues of psychic and social development, not facts merely to observe and describe. The modern tendency is to avoid firm and definitive statements of values, often in the imagined interests of maintaining a reputation for scientific objectivity or of cultural and social tolerance.
This widely prevalent misconception assumes that the spirit of truth and liberality somehow binds us to remain passive observers and never to intervene in the free-for-all of moral conflict by asserting positive values. The long-bemoaned loss of central values through the disruptions of traditional religious society and the consequent value relativism in all fields, from science and the humanities to religion, from morals to the arts, as world cultures come into contact and clash with one another has blinded the humanities to the existence of common denominator values that have always existed and been practiced to various extents in great world cultures.
All the social sciences, from history to social anthropology, have failed to discern clearly the common essence of religions, cultures and societies, with the consequent chronic inability to isolate which values are necessary to the good life, whatever the race or creed.
The human sciences have taken refuge in the flawed doctrine of value neutrality, psychologists tend to be uncertain about professionally defending any values, other than the scientifically motivating value of truth, in case they are then seen as moralists, absolutists and worse.
World conditions today therefore call desperately for truly human science that not only describes ethical values scientifically, but is itself ethically-directed in its approach to all questions. Through the intelligent application of definitive values, both in theory and practice, psychology becomes a dynamic force for the good, rather than a floundering academic tradition playing at being a natural science.
To do so it must not only articulate and explain values, but assert them in the face of anti-values. This obviously need not exclude objective and comparative research into values and their consequences, experimentally and otherwise.
Any theory of human values or principles must show its value in practice as well as having explanatory power in theory. It has become essential to recognise that the much-discussed degeneration, destruction and lack of values today has to do with their relative neglect in upbringing, education and not least in the sciences of psychology and pedagogy.
The values according to or against which we act are the unavoidable and essential element of all important decisions in the human arena. Values are the link that tie together personal perceptions and judgements, motives and actions. The same applies in understanding social and political life.
A make-or-break idea is that values or precepts - and their various practical consequences in life - are at least as fundamental to understanding man and society as are the much-vaunted physical necessities.
They are also essential in improving man and society too. Values, even more than observable facts, are keys to understanding the reality behind the scene outwardly presented by human behaviour. Motives and purposes are value determinations. An action that seemed good at first can be seen as bad from a proper appreciation of motives, or unfortunate when the practical consequences are known.
Both these viewpoints are attitudinal assumptions, and the test of them is which is likely to prove more fruitful. Only by adopting one, then following up the consequences of so doing, can its rationality and fruitfulness or practical validity be evaluated.
The relevant information for deciding this is itself doubtless extremely manifold and its overall interpretation is fraught with difficulty. History, anthropology and the comparative humanities all provide evidence that must somehow be interpreted or judged, as does world philosophy, literature and religion.
This difficulty is much aggravated, however, if one lacks some firm, inclusive and consistent overall understanding of the human being to work from, which is one reason for the present such view based on Vedantic insights.
Psychological theories always tend to have some kind of legitimising effect, as well as a self-fulfilling leaning: Likewise, Marxian theory has attempted to justify - and has historically hastened attempts at - changing society through revolution.
Those who hold physicalistic theories strongly, may themselves tend to validate various consequences of their own theories in their own behaviour, not least because of this mind-set.
More important psychologically perhaps is laying much weight on the evolutionary animal origin of the human being, which tends to legitimise more animalistic behaviour than would emphasis on human discernment and conscience as our inherent intellectual, moral faculty.
Ideas and theories can work in various subtle ways to become long-term self-fulfilling prophesies. This does not, of course, make them true ideas, only to realise them in action. Despite the above, and though there will most likely still be both local errors and uncharted gaps in all theories, some will still be closer to the whole truth than others.
One important outcome of this line of reasoning, however, is that which theory one chooses to develop is itself primarily a moral question, based on the value of truth. A theory with a wide scope and which can embody the full range of human values will tend towards greater fruitfulness and higher fulfilment than lesser visions.
Intellectually, the wider the scope the better, for it will be closer to the whole truth.Critical thinking is a term that we hear a lot, but many people don't really stop to think about what it means or how to use it. This lesson will tell you exactly what it means and make you.
An amount that has to be paid or given up in order to get something.. In business, cost is usually a monetary valuation of (1) effort, (2) material, (3) resources, (4) time and utilities consumed, (5) risks incurred, and (6) opportunity forgone in production and delivery of a good or service.
All expenses are costs, but not all costs (such as those incurred in acquisition of an income. Complexity characterises the behaviour of a system or model whose components interact in multiple ways and follow local rules, meaning there is no reasonable higher instruction to define the various possible interactions..
The term is generally used to characterize something with many parts where those parts interact with each other in multiple ways, culminating in a higher order of emergence.
Viktor Frankl was the first and most influential psychotherapist to discover the vital role of meaning in healing and well-being. He re-humanized psychology and psychotherapy by restoring the importance of the human soul and spirit. Fideisms Judaism is the Semitic monotheistic fideist religion based on the Old Testament's ( BCE) rules for the worship of Yahweh by his chosen people, the children of Abraham's son Isaac (c BCE)..
Zoroastrianism is the Persian monotheistic fideist religion founded by Zarathustra (cc BCE) and which teaches that good must be chosen over evil in order to achieve salvation. UNIVERSALITY OF HUMAN VALUES Whether any values exist that are universally held in esteem and have objective validity as an essential part of the human make-up is today often either doubted outright or regarded as an unverified hypothesis.