Assessment II
1. Sensuous values
Anything that is pleasing to the senses can be called sensuous. The feel of a soft cashmere sweater on your skin, the taste of dark chocolate, even the smell of your favorite person — all of these can be sensuous experiences.
Sensuous describes anything that feels, tastes, smells, looks, or sounds good. Eating delicious food or relaxing in a warm bath are sensuous activities. But something intellectually satisfying, like doing a crossword puzzle or solving a math problem, is not exactly sensuous, even if you really like doing it. Use sensuous to describe stuff that makes your five senses happy.
2. Economic values
What Is Economic Value?
Economic value is the value that person places on an economic good based on the benefit that they derive from the good. It is often estimated based on the person’s willingness to pay for the good, typically measured in units of currency. The economic value should not be confused with market value, which is the market price for a good or service which can be higher or lower than the economic value that any particular person puts on a good.
3. Social values
What is social value? Social value is the quantification of the relative importance that people place on the changes they experience in their lives. Some, but not all of this value is captured in market prices. It is important to consider and measure this social value from the perspective of those affected by an organisation’s work.
Examples of social value might be the value we experience from increasing our confidence, or from living next to a community park. These things are important to us, but are not commonly expressed or measured in the same way that financial value is.
4. Aesthetic values
Definition
Aesthetic value is the value that an object, event, or state of affairs (most paradigmatically an artwork or the natural environment) possesses in virtue of its capacity to elicit pleasure (positive value) or displeasure (negative value) when appreciated or experienced aesthetically.
Description
Everything that is valuable is valuable in a variety of ways. Art objects often have sentimental value, historical value, or financial value. Wilderness can have economic value as well as recreational value. But great artworks are thought to possess a distinctive sort of noninstrumental and nonutilitarian value that is of central concern when they are evaluated as artworks. It might be thought that this value is beauty, but many artworks are not beautiful.
5. Egoism
the habit of valuing everything only in reference to one's personal interest; selfishness (opposed to altruism). egotism or conceit. Ethics. the view that morality ultimately rests on self-interest.
6. Altruism vs Egoism
Altruism and egoism are two views of human motivation. Altruism holds that people can act to benefit others rather than simply pursuing their own self-interest. Egoism holds that people seek to pursue their own self-interest. Notably, egoism can be used to explain actions that appear to be altruistic.
7. Universalism
Universalism implies that it is possible to apply generalized norms, values, or concepts to all people and cultures, regardless of the contexts in which they are located.
8. Sarvodaya
Sarvodaya means 'progress of all' or 'Universal uplift'. Gandhi started this Sarvodaya movement, and people consider it an addition to his efforts in his non-violence movement. The main objective of this event was to establish a new India based on non-violence and love.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarvodaya
9. Psychological problems
10. Reaction vs response
11. Problem solving mechanism
1. Identify a problem.
2. Define a problem.
3. Analyze the problem.
4. Propose solutions.
5. Evaluate the solutions.
12. Problems in hierarchy of values
In accordance with the above principles, Scheler classified the values into the following four categories(from the bottom to the top); (1) the value of pleasure and displeasure(the emotional value), (2) the value of the sense of life(and welfare as a subsidiary value to it), (3) the mental value(perception, beauty, justice), (4) the value of holiness.
13. Views of Gandhi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi
14. Views of Madan mohan malaviya
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madan_Mohan_Malaviya
15. Sustenance of values
Sustenance Add to list Share. Sustenance comes from the word sustain, which means to continue. Sustenance is food or drink that allows you to continue to be alive. For many, prayer is a source of spiritual sustenance.
16. Problems in sustenance of values in social, political and technological change
17. Vasudhaiva kutumbakam
Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam is a Sanskrit phrase found in Hindu texts such as the Maha Upanishad, which means "The World Is One Family".[2] Vedic tradition mentions "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" meaning all living beings on the earth are a family.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasudhaiva_Kutumbakam
Assessment 1:
1. Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Value
Intrinsic value has traditionally been thought1. to lie at the heart of ethics. Philosophers use a number of terms to refer to such value. The intrinsic value of something is said to be the value that that thing has “in itself,” or “for its own sake,” or “as such,” or “in its own right.” Extrinsic value is value that is not intrinsic.
Many philosophers take intrinsic value to be crucial to a variety of moral judgments. For example, according to a fundamental form of consequentialism, whether an action is morally right or wrong has exclusively to do with whether its consequences are intrinsically better than those of any other action one can perform under the circumstances. Many other theories also hold that what it is right or wrong to do has at least in part to do with the intrinsic value of the consequences of the actions one can perform. Moreover, if, as is commonly believed, what one is morally responsible for doing is some function of the rightness or wrongness of what one does, then intrinsic value would seem relevant to judgments about responsibility, too. Intrinsic value is also often taken to be pertinent to judgments about moral justice (whether having to do with moral rights or moral desert), insofar as it is good that justice is done and bad that justice is denied, in ways that appear intimately tied to intrinsic value. Finally, it is typically thought that judgments about moral virtue and vice also turn on questions of intrinsic value, inasmuch as virtues are good, and vices bad, again in ways that appear closely connected to such value.
All four types of moral judgments have been the subject of discussion since the dawn of western philosophy in ancient Greece. The Greeks themselves were especially concerned with questions about virtue and vice, and the concept of intrinsic value may be found at work in their writings and in the writings of moral philosophers ever since. Despite this fact, and rather surprisingly, it is only within the last one hundred years or so that this concept has itself been the subject of sustained scrutiny, and even within this relatively brief period the scrutiny has waxed and waned.
- 1. What Has Intrinsic Value?
- 2. What Is Intrinsic Value?
- 3. Is There Such a Thing As Intrinsic Value At All?
- 4. What Sort of Thing Can Have Intrinsic Value?
- 5. How Is Intrinsic Value to Be Computed?
- 6. What Is Extrinsic Value?
- Bibliography
- Academic Tools
- Other Internet Resources
- Related Entries
1. What Has Intrinsic Value?
The question “What is intrinsic value?” is more fundamental than the question “What has intrinsic value?,” but historically these have been treated in reverse order. For a long time, philosophers appear to have thought that the notion of intrinsic value is itself sufficiently clear to allow them to go straight to the question of what should be said to have intrinsic value. Not even a potted history of what has been said on this matter can be attempted here, since the record is so rich. Rather, a few representative illustrations must suffice.
In his dialogue Protagoras, Plato [428–347 B.C.E.] maintains (through the character of Socrates, modeled after the real Socrates [470–399 B.C.E.], who was Plato’s teacher) that, when people condemn pleasure, they do so, not because they take pleasure to be bad as such, but because of the bad consequences they find pleasure often to have. For example, at one point Socrates says that the only reason why the pleasures of food and drink and sex seem to be evil is that they result in pain and deprive us of future pleasures (Plato, Protagoras, 353e). He concludes that pleasure is in fact good as such and pain bad, regardless of what their consequences may on occasion be. In the Timaeus, Plato seems quite pessimistic about these consequences, for he has Timaeus declare pleasure to be “the greatest incitement to evil” and pain to be something that “deters from good” (Plato, Timaeus, 69d). Plato does not think of pleasure as the “highest” good, however. In the Republic, Socrates states that there can be no “communion” between “extravagant” pleasure and virtue (Plato, Republic, 402e) and in the Philebus, where Philebus argues that pleasure is the highest good, Socrates argues against this, claiming that pleasure is better when accompanied by intelligence (Plato, Philebus, 60e).
Many philosophers have followed Plato’s lead in declaring pleasure intrinsically good and pain intrinsically bad. Aristotle [384–322 B.C.E.], for example, himself a student of Plato’s, says at one point that all are agreed that pain is bad and to be avoided, either because it is bad “without qualification” or because it is in some way an “impediment” to us; he adds that pleasure, being the “contrary” of that which is to be avoided, is therefore necessarily a good (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 1153b). Over the course of the more than two thousand years since this was written, this view has been frequently endorsed. Like Plato, Aristotle does not take pleasure and pain to be the only things that are intrinsically good and bad, although some have maintained that this is indeed the case. This more restrictive view, often called hedonism, has had proponents since the time of Epicurus [341–271 B.C.E.].[1] Perhaps the most thorough renditions of it are to be found in the works of Jeremy Bentham [1748–1832] and Henry Sidgwick [1838–1900] (see Bentham 1789, Sidgwick 1907); perhaps its most famous proponent is John Stuart Mill [1806–1873] (see Mill 1863).
Most philosophers who have written on the question of what has intrinsic value have not been hedonists; like Plato and Aristotle, they have thought that something besides pleasure and pain has intrinsic value. One of the most comprehensive lists of intrinsic goods that anyone has suggested is that given by William Frankena (Frankena 1973, pp. 87–88): life, consciousness, and activity; health and strength; pleasures and satisfactions of all or certain kinds; happiness, beatitude, contentment, etc.; truth; knowledge and true opinions of various kinds, understanding, wisdom; beauty, harmony, proportion in objects contemplated; aesthetic experience; morally good dispositions or virtues; mutual affection, love, friendship, cooperation; just distribution of goods and evils; harmony and proportion in one’s own life; power and experiences of achievement; self-expression; freedom; peace, security; adventure and novelty; and good reputation, honor, esteem, etc. (Presumably a corresponding list of intrinsic evils could be provided.) Almost any philosopher who has ever addressed the question of what has intrinsic value will find his or her answer represented in some way by one or more items on Frankena’s list. (Frankena himself notes that he does not explicitly include in his list the communion with and love and knowledge of God that certain philosophers believe to be the highest good, since he takes them to fall under the headings of “knowledge” and “love.”) One conspicuous omission from the list, however, is the increasingly popular view that certain environmental entities or qualities have intrinsic value (although Frankena may again assert that these are implicitly represented by one or more items already on the list). Some find intrinsic value, for example, in certain “natural” environments (wildernesses untouched by human hand); some find it in certain animal species; and so on.
Suppose that you were confronted with some proposed list of intrinsic goods. It would be natural to ask how you might assess the accuracy of the list. How can you tell whether something has intrinsic value or not? On one level, this is an epistemological question about which this article will not be concerned. (See the entry in this encyclopedia on moral epistemology.) On another level, however, this is a conceptual question, for we cannot be sure that something has intrinsic value unless we understand what it is for something to have intrinsic value.
2. 2. What Is Extrinsic Value?
At the beginning of this article, extrinsic value was said simply—too simply—to be value that is not intrinsic. Later, once intrinsic value had been characterized as nonderivative value of a certain, perhaps moral kind, extrinsic value was said more particularly to be derivative value of that same kind. That which is extrinsically good is good, not (insofar as its extrinsic value is concerned) for its own sake, but for the sake of something else to which it is related in some way. For example, the goodness of helping others in time of need is plausibly thought to be extrinsic (at least in part), being derivative (at least in part) from the goodness of something else, such as these people’s needs being satisfied, or their experiencing pleasure, to which helping them is related in some causal way.
Two questions arise. The first is whether so-called extrinsic value is really a type of value at all. There would seem to be a sense in which it is not, for it does not add to or detract from the value in the world. Consider some long chain of derivation. Suppose that the extrinsic value of A can be traced to the intrinsic value of Z by way of B, C, D… Thus A is good (for example) because of B, which is good because of C, and so on, until we get to Y’s being good because of Z; when it comes to Z, however, we have something that is good, not because of something else, but “because of itself,” i.e., for its own sake. In this sort of case, the values of A, B, …, Y are all parasitic on the value of Z. It is Z’s value that contributes to the value there is in the world; A, B, …, Y contribute no value of their own. (As long as the value of Z is the only intrinsic value at stake, no change of value would be effected in or imparted to the world if a shorter route from A to Z were discovered, one that bypassed some letters in the middle of the alphabet.)
Why talk of “extrinsic value” at all, then? The answer can only be that we just do say that certain things are good, and others bad, not for their own sake but for the sake of something else to which they are related in some way. To say that these things are good and bad only in a derivative sense, that their value is merely parasitic on or reflective of the value of something else, is one thing; to deny that they are good or bad in any respectable sense is quite another. The former claim is accurate; hence the latter would appear unwarranted.
If we accept that talk of “extrinsic value” can be appropriate, however, a second question then arises: what sort of relation must obtain between A and Z if A is to be said to be good “because of” Z? It is not clear just what the answer to this question is. Philosophers have tended to focus on just one particular causal relation, the means-end relation. This is the relation at issue in the example given earlier: helping others is a means to their needs being satisfied, which is itself a means to their experiencing pleasure. The term most often used to refer to this type of extrinsic value is “instrumental value,” although there is some dispute as to just how this term is to be employed. (Remember also, from Section 3 above, that on some views “instrumental value” may refer to a type of intrinsic, or final, value.) Suppose that A is a means to Z, and that Z is intrinsically good. Should we therefore say that A is instrumentally good? What if A has another consequence, Y, and this consequence is intrinsically bad? What, especially, if the intrinsic badness of Yis greater than the intrinsic goodness of Z? Some would say that in such a case A is both instrumentally good (because of Z) and instrumentally bad (because of Y). Others would say that it is correct to say that A is instrumentally good only if all of A’s causal consequences that have intrinsic value are, taken as a whole, intrinsically good. Still others would say that whether something is instrumentally good depends not only on what it causes to happen but also on what it prevents from happening (cf. Bradley 1998). For example, if pain is intrinsically bad, and taking an aspirin puts a stop to your pain but causes nothing of any positive intrinsic value, some would say that taking the aspirin is instrumentally good despite its having no intrinsically good consequences.
Types of Love:
The notion of love is actually quite complex. We can love someone in the notion of love and go on to marry and make a life with them. We can love a child unconditionally with our entire sense of self. We can love a parent or a best friend, but in a very different way than we love our significant other. We can show love and compassion for others. We need to figure out what self love means before anything else. Commenting that we love pancakes has a very different connotation when we utter “I love you” for the first time.
Interestingly enough, the solitary word “love” is somehow supposed to encompass all of these emotions and feelings. Perhaps society has taught us to distinguish the various types and degrees of love based on connotations, nuances, or experiences. In contrast, philosophers in ancient Greece made the concept more concrete by breaking it down into various categories. Ancient Greek philosophers came up with seven types of love, as follows.
Eros: Love of the body
This type of love illustrates sexual attraction, physical desire towards others, and a lack of control. It is powerful, passionate, and can dissipate quickly. Relationships that are built solely on Eros love tend to be short-lived.
Philia: Affectionate love
Philia love accounts for the type of love that you feel for parents, siblings, family members, and close friends. This type of love is linked with loyalty, companionship, and trust. Philia love is shared among those who have similar values and experiences. The Greek philosophers considered Philia to be an equal love and valued it higher than Eros love.
Storge: Love of the Child
This type of love describes the unconditional love that parents have for their children. It is defined by unconditional approval, acceptance, and sacrifice. This type of love helps a child to develop through attachment, encouragement, and security.
Agape: Selfless Love
Agape love is representative of universal love. Greek philosophers felt that this is the type of love that people feel for other humans, for nature, and for a higher power. This love can be most easily expressed through meditation, nature, intuition, and spirituality. Agape love can be used interchangeably for charity and care for others.
Ludus: Playful Love
Playful love is defined by flirtatiousness, seduction, and sex without commitment. The focal point of this love is on the experience rather than attraction or feelings. Ludus is evident in the beginning of a relationship and is comprised with elements of play, teasing, and excitement.
Pragma: Long-lasting Love
Long-lasting love is evident in couples who have been together for a long period of time. This type of love continues to develop throughout the years and portrays synchronization and balance. This type of love can only survive with constant maintenance and nurturance.
Philautia: Love of the Self
Self-love is linked with confidence and self-worth and is necessary for a sense of purpose and fitting in. Philautia can be unhealthy and linked to narcissistic behaviors and arrogance, or can be healthy in the sense that we love ourselves before we learn how to love others. Greek philosophers believed that true happiness could only be achieved when one had unconditional love for themselves.
Perhaps we do not break down the concept of love like the ancient Greek philosophers once did. Admittedly, it would likely be very complicated to incorporate these Greek terms into our day to day conversations. However, there are bits and pieces and truths from each one that help to comprise our notion of love today. It is interesting to wonder if we would have more understanding or respect for emotional, sexual, or physical intimacy if we broke it down into smaller concepts.
3. Equity vs. Equality: What’s the Difference?
November 5, 2020
While the terms equity and equality may sound similar, the implementation of one versus the other can lead to dramatically different outcomes for marginalized people.
Equality means each individual or group of people is given the same resources or opportunities. Equity recognizes that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome.
In the illustration below, two individuals have unequal access to a system — in this case, the tree that provides fruit. With equal support from evenly distributed tools, their access to the fruit still remains unequal. The equitable solution, however, allocates the exact resources that each person needs to access the fruit, leading to positive outcomes for both individuals.
While the tree appears to be a naturally occurring system, it’s critical to remember that social systems aren’t naturally inequitable — they’ve been intentionally designed to reward specific demographics for so long that the system’s outcomes may appear unintentional but are actually rooted discriminatory practices and beliefs.
INEQUALITY
EQUALITY
EQUITY
JUSTICE
Source: “Addressing Imbalance,” by Tony Ruth for the 2019 Design in Tech Report.External link:open_in_new
Equity is a solution for addressing imbalanced social systems. Justice can take equity one step further by fixing the systems in a way that leads to long-term, sustainable, equitable access for generations to come.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), equity is definedExternal link:open_in_new as “the absence of avoidable or remediable differences among groups of people, whether those groups are defined socially, economically, demographically or geographically.” Therefore, as the WHO notes, health inequities involve more than lack of equal access to needed resources to maintain or improve health outcomes. They also refer to difficulty when it comes to “inequalities that infringe on fairness and human rights norms.”
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) refers to health equityExternal link:open_in_new as “when everyone has the opportunity to be as healthy as possible.” As such, equity is a process and equality is an outcome of that process. Or, as the Race Matters InstituteExternal link:open_in_new describes, “The route to achieving equity will not be accomplished through treating everyone equally. It will be achieved by treating everyone equitably, or justly according to their circumstances.”
Understanding the difference between health equality and health equityExternal link:open_in_new is important to public health to ensure that resources are directed appropriately — as well as supporting the ongoing process of meeting people where they are. Inherent to this process is the promotion of diversity in teams and personnel, public health practice, research methods and other related factors. For these reasons, providing the same type and number of resources to all is not enough. In order to reduce the health disparities gap, the underlying issues and individual needs of underserved and vulnerable populations must be effectively addressed.
The Difference Between Equity and Equality
“The route to achieving equity will not be accomplished through treating everyone equally. It will be achieved by treating everyone justly according to their circumstances.”
—Paula Dressel, Race Matters Institute 1
EXAMPLES OF EQUALITY2
A city cuts the budget for 25 community centers by reducing the operational hours for all centers by the same amount at the same times.
A community meeting, where all members of the community are invited, about a local environmental health concern is held in English though English is not the primary language for 25% of the residents.
Examples of EqualityAll public schools in a community have computer labs with the same number of computers and hours of operation during school hours.
EXAMPLES OF EQUITY2
The city determines which times and how many hours communities actually need to use their community centers and reduces hours for centers that aren’t used as frequently.
Examples of EquityThe community leaders hire translators to attend the meeting or offer an additional meeting held in another language.
Examples of EquityComputer labs in lower income neighborhoods have more computers and printers, as well as longer hours of operation, as some students don’t have access to computers or internet at home.
There are many successful initiatives in communities around the United States where specific steps have been taken to make approaches to health more equitable (PDF, 4.9MB),External link:open_in_new according to the CDC. Attempts to achieve equity have involved identifying the individualized needs of specific populations and implementing steps to help meet those needs. Below are three examples of public health initiatives.
Project Brotherhood
Project BrotherhoodExternal link:open_in_new — a clinic for Black men at Woodlawn Health Center in Chicago — was created through the CDC’s Healthy Communities Program. The clinic was formed by a Black physician and a nurse-epidemiologist who were interested in better addressing the health needs of Black men. Partnering with a Black social science researcher, they conducted focus groups with Black men to learn about their experiences with the health care system and met with other Black staff at the clinic. As a result of this research, Project Brotherhood employed a number of specific strategies, including:
Offering free health care, with optional appointments and evening clinic hours, to make health care more accessible to Black men.
Providing health seminars and courses specifically for Black men.
Employing a barber to perform free haircuts after receiving health education training to be a health advocate for Black men whom the clinic staff could not reach.
Providing fatherhood classes to help Black men become more effectively involved in the lives of their children.
Building “a culturally competent workforce able to create a safe, respectful, male-friendly environment and to overcome mistrust in Black communities toward the traditional health care system.”
Organizing physician participation in support group discussions to enhance understanding between providers and patients.
According to the organization, positive outcomes were achieved: “In January 1999, Project Brotherhood averaged four medical visits and eight group participants per week. By September 2005, the average grew to 27 medical visits and 35 group participants per week….” By 2007, Project Brotherhood had provided service to more than 13,000 people since the initiative started and created a health services environment designed specifically for Black men where they would be respected, heard and empowered, thus helping to reduce the health disparities experienced by this population.
Poder es Salud
Poder es Salud (Power for Health)External link:open_in_new is a partnership involving nonprofits, government organizations, local health care providers and several community- and faith-based groups. This partnership was formed to address social determinants of health and reduce health disparities in Black and Latino communities in Multnomah County, Oregon, by employing an approach to “increase social capital through durable social networks for the purpose of facilitating the achievement of community goals and health outcomes.” This was achieved through three specific strategies:
Conducting community-based participatory research to support cross-cultural partnerships.
Implementing popular education, which involves mutual learning and analysis.
Providing community health workers with specialized training “in leadership, local politics, governance structure, advocacy, community organizing, popular education, and health.”
Program effectiveness was reflected in follow-up surveys that showed “significant improvements in social support, self-rated health and mental health among community members that participated in the interventions with community health workers who use popular education.”
Project BRAVE: Building and Revitalizing an Anti-Violence Environment
Project BRAVEExternal link:open_in_new is a school-based intervention that builds on existing relationships among schools, community members, community-based organizations and local researchers. In doing so, Project BRAVE supports preexisting opportunities for students to share their experiences with violence and to take part in community change to reduce it. The program’s effectiveness was evidenced by an increase in school attendance, which is an important social determinant of community health.
Using Equity and Equality in Public Health Practice
Understanding the difference between equity and equality is a key component in the effort to reduce health disparities among vulnerable populations. The good news is that public health officials can take specific steps to help address this confusion in their own communities — including using educational resources such as the CDC’s Defining and Measuring Disparities, Inequities, and Inequalities in the Healthy People Initiative (PDF, 391KB)External link:open_in_new and group exercises such as those suggested by JustHealthAction (PDF, 637KB),External link:open_in_new in which teams can work together to differentiate between equity and equality.
Additional Resources about Equity and Equality
Office of Health Equity,External link:open_in_new U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Health Equity,External link:open_in_new American Public Health Association
Equity of Opportunity,External link:open_in_new U.S. Department of Education
Health Equity: Why It Matters, and How To Take Action,External link:open_in_new Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Racial Equity Impact Assessment Toolkit,External link:open_in_new Race Forward
Equity vs. Equality: 6 Steps Toward Equity,External link:open_in_new Edutopia
Sources:
1 “Racial Equality or Racial Equity? The Difference it Makes,” Race Matters Institute. 2014. Accessed Oct. 15, 2020. http://viablefuturescenter.org/racemattersinstitute/2014/04/02/racial-equality-or-racial-equity-the-difference-it-makes/
2 “How are Equity and Equality Different?” Just Health Action, 2010. Accessed Oct. 15, 2010. http://justhealthaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/JHA-Lesson-Plan-3-How-are-equity-and-equality-different-final.pdf
Citation for this content: MPH@GW, the George Washington University online Master of Public Health program
Our society is continuing to make steps towards equality but being equal and fair is not always straightforward. Sometimes, people may need differing treatment to make their opportunities the same as another’s. This is called equity. Does this mean we need to treat people differently in order to gain equality? If so, how can we do this without undermining equality?
What is Equality?
The Equality and Human Rights Commission describe equality as:
“Ensuring that every individual has an equal opportunity to make the most of their lives and talents.”
In other words, equality means ensuring that everyone has the same opportunities and receives the same treatment and support.
What is Equity?
Equity is about giving people what they need, in order to make things fair.
Giving more to those who need it.
This is not the same as equality, nor is it the same as inequality. It is simply giving more to those who need it, which is proportionate to their own circumstances, in order to ensure that everyone has the same opportunities; for example providing more support to a disadvantaged student so they can reach their full potential.
Equality vs. Equity
The difference between equality and equity must be emphasised. Although both promote fairness, equality achieves this through treating everyone the same regardless of need, while equity achieves this through treating people differently dependent on need. However, this different treatment may be the key to reaching equality.
4. Prushartha
Maslow's hierarchy of needs:
Purusartha: Goals of mann
UIt is a key concept in Hinduism, and refers to the four proper goals or aims of a human life. The four puruṣārthas are Dharma (righteousness, moral values), Artha (prosperity, economic values), Kama (pleasure, love, psychological values) and Moksha (liberation, spiritual values).
Hierarchy of Values:
Scheler classified the values into the following four categories(from the bottom to the top); (1) the value of pleasure and displeasure(the emotional value), (2) the value of the sense of life(and welfare as a subsidiary value to it), (3) the mental value(perception, beauty, justice), (4) the value of holiness.
Classification of Values
I will discuss what kinds of values exist, before talking about their hierarchy. Walter Goodnow Everett classified values into the following eight categories; (1) economic values, (2) bodily values, (3) value of recreation, (4) value of association, (5) character values, (6) aesthetic values, (7) intellectual values, (8) religious values.
Sarvodaya:
Progress to all
The important motives of sarvodaya...
Trustship, economic equality, nationality, truth, non violence.
Gandhi.
The King of Kindness
Vinoba Bhave and His Nonviolent Revolution
By Mark Shepard
Excerpted and adapted from the book Gandhi Today: A Report on Mahatma Gandhi’s Successors, Simple Productions, Arcata, California, 1987, reprinted by Seven Locks Press, Washington, D.C., 1987
Yuga in Hinduism:
yuga, in Hinduism, is a large period of time as it relates to the past, present and future. It is mostly used to describe one of the four dharmic ages—Satya Yuga, Treta Yuga, Dvapara Yuga or Kali Yuga—or a cycle of the four ages...
Sisters and brothers speech by swami Vivekananda...
Rk Mukherjee
Swami Vivekananda
Mahatma Gandhi
- Right to equality (Articles. 14-18)
- Right to Freedom (Articles. 19-22)
- Right Against Exploitation (Articles. 23-24)
- Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles. 25-28)
- Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles. 29-30), and
- Right to Constitutional remedies (Articles. 32-35)
The Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) is a values classification instrument. Developed by social psychologist Milton Rokeach, the instrument is designed for rank-order scaling of 36 values, including 18 terminal and 18 instrumental values.[1] The task for participants in the survey is to arrange the 18 terminal values, followed by the 18 instrumental values, into an order "of importance to YOU, as guiding principles in YOUR life".[1]:27
The RVS has been studied in the context of personality psychology, behavior, marketing, social structure and cross-cultural studies.[2][3] There have been a number of attempts to reduce the 18 instrumental values and 18 terminal values into a set of underlying factors, but without consistent success. Attempts have included that by Feather and Peay in 1975[4] and by Charles Johnston in 1995.[3]
Rokeach's RVS is based on a 1968 volume (Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values) which presented the philosophical basis for the association of fundamental values with beliefs and attitudes.[5] His value system was instrumentalised into the Rokeach Value Survey in his 1973 book The Nature of Human Values.[1]z
Shalom Schwartz - Ten Universal Values:
Shalom Schwartz has defined a set of ten universal human values that can also be seen as basic needs, underlying and driving much of what we do. Self-DirectionWhen we have autonomy we are able to make our own decisions, control our own thoughts and bodies, go where we wish, and even be creative without fear of criticism or being prevented from doing so. It also implies we have the resources to do these things. In a democratic society this is a basic freedom (within the constraints of the law). StimulationWhen we are stimulated, our emotions are aroused as we find interest in the world around us. We can feel excited about new experiences. We can take on challenges that help us work with passion towards rewarding achievements. HedonismRelated to stimulation is hedonism, where we seek a basic and often bodily arousal in sensuous pleasures. This often has a shorter-term focus than stimulation, which can include life challenges. AchievementWe seek achievement through challenges that stimulate us and of which we can feel proud. This is one of the ways in which our workplace can offer pleasure or (if we are not able to achieve) an unsatisfactory frustration. PowerPower is the ability to achieve, to get what you want. It can include factors such as formal authority, the control of resource and personal charisma. Power can be like a resource itself when it can be built up and then depleted as it is used. SecurityWhen we are secure we are safe from dangers, threats and other risks that may harm us. Having power allows us to increase our security. It also provides a base on which we can seek to satisfy other needs without having to constantly be alert. ConformityWhen we conform to rules, we gain a comfortable sense of familiarity and an assurance that we will be secure. In particular, non-conformance often causes social reaction where others in our group may seek to correct those who do not conform. While this reduces our own freedom, it decreases the chance of other people who do not conform acting in ways that are harmful to us. TraditionConformity also can be found in the desire to sustain traditions. This can be seen in rituals that be found in social interactions, religious services and so on. Respect for social rules and others in our social groups is a common aspect of tradition as this helps to sustain the status quo. BenevolenceBenevolence involves being kind and fair to others, forgiving their transgressions and ensuring that they are looked after. In this way, the welfare of the social group is sustained and those within it feel confident that they themselves would be helped if they fell on hard times. |
Sensual and sensuous values:
Sensual - bodily pleasure
Sensuous - mental pleasure.
Sensuous pleasure John Milton 1:7 th c
"BEP20 Token is a unique token standard created to classify and describe tokens on the Binance Smart Chain. It is being used in numerous blockchain, NFT and DeFi applications and is becoming increasingly popular. Coin Developer India is a leading BEP20 Token Development Company
ReplyDeleteoffering cost-efficient services. BEP721 is a modification of ERC721 and BEP1155 combines BEP-20's fungibility and BEP-721's non-fungibility."