Download pfd

Approaches to a Psychology of Value by George Mandler, University of California, San Diego, and University College London
A central premise here is that our emotions are determined by our perceptions, not the other way around: “Values, even simple preferences, do not arise out of emotion; rather they contribute to emotional experiences. One might consider emotions to be a common language metaphor for the intense expression of values.” (P 232) Values become habitual to the point that we don’t realize that they control our perceptions: “We know what we like, what foods and works of art we prefer, and we know that automatically, without reflection.” (P 233) There are different levels of values, ranging from those that we find the most important to the least. Because of the values we have adopted, we automatically see persons and situations as good or bad, which also is tied to our emotional experience.
We create “schemas” about the world around us which are our internal representations – regardless of whether there is an objective reality. Each new experience is interpreted in terms of the values we already have adopted: “Food aversions…are frequently acquired without any contact with the actual substances, as are likes and dislikes of people or groups of people. Culturally acquired esthetic judgments of beauty, whether of people, landscapes, or paintings, may be similarly acquired.” (P 241) But as we encounter similar situations repeatedly, these experiences become integrated into our worldview so that they begin to fit into our internal representation of the world. We prefer the known to the unknown, but we eventually integrate the unknown into our worldview, and onetime negative experiences can become more acceptable over time. We are more likely to seek or accept changes that represent an escape from situations that we have deemed intolerable, but we can also adjust to what was once seen as unpleasant that we are comfortable with it, such as abuse. Our core values can expand from those held by a small group to society at large which are at this level become seen as the norm. As biologists contend, the values we hold are expressions of the way that we have already evolved to see the world: “Universal emotional states are universal because of the way the human world is constructed…some form of grief and sadness will always be found in all human societies, but the specific nature and content of the grief, guilt, etc. will be determined by the social context…” (P 256)

Biology and the Origin of Values by Richard E. Michod, Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona
“Offspring resemble their parents because they possess copies of their parents’ DNA…but…offspring may have traits similar to their parents because of learning. This is especially true of behavioral traits and psychological traits such as values…[such as in] religious preference.” (P 262)  “As a result of these different values, family size would often be larger for families belonging to the religion opposing birth control…selection could occur based on the basis of religious preference.” (P 263)  “…culture acts as a repository of values for the collective knowledge of individuals, both living and dead. A stable environment is required for social learning to be favored over individual learning so that the rules taught by a culture are adaptive in the present environment. On the other hand, individual learning is adaptive when the environment changes rapidly and cultural knowledge is out of date.” (P 264)  “The capacity for values is most adaptive in variable environments, while culture (social learning) is most adaptive in stable environments.”  (P 265) “The concept of inclusive fitness [survival potential of small groups], and the attendant cost/benefit rule for spread of an altruistic gene…have revolutionized the way biologists and some social scientists view behavior.” (P 266) “For the same reason that the [gene] donor can pass on more of its genes by helping its offspring (for example, by providing parental care), so the donor may increase the frequency of its genes by helping…other relatives.” (P 267) “The issue is not whether human behavior is genetically determined. In fact, just the opposite is really the claim. The idea is that evolution provided us with values instead of programming us genetically [animals thus do not have values].” (P268) “There are many examples of biological traits that evolved for one reason but are used for another. The human brain and nervous system did not evolve in environments in which there were violins, but that did not discourage Beethoven…we expect that the capacity for values initially had large beneficial effects on inclusive fitness.” (P 269) “The circuit works from the biological point of view, so long as the changed circumstances are not too different from that in which it evolved. Yet in radically different environments the rules and cues…may no longer work.” (P 270)

How are Values Transmitted? by L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Professor of Genetics at Stanford
Cavalli-Sforza is one of the most renowned geneticists of our time. He believes that cultural factors account for the transmission of customs and values as well as genetic factors. He is a proponent of the view that race is not a genetic fact, but a cultural construct. He cites studies of twins, which in some cases share similar mental illnesses and in some cases do not. Customs can be passed on culturally for generations, as has been noted in the Pygmies who live in contact with other cultures but still maintain their customs. Cavalli-Sforza also believes that aggressive interaction is also a value that can be taught and transmitted to others and does not seem to be culturally based: “A comparison of Scandinavians of a thousand years ago – the ferocious Vikings – with modern Scandinavians, certainly the most peaceful people in Europe, makes me feel that aggression is largely determined by cultural factors.” (P 311) Like other influential biologists of our time, Cavalli-Sforza believes that “major skills develop from the combination of biological drives and cultural transmission. We would not have developed our language skills without a strong drive for learning language at a young age.” (P 314)

Morality Recapitulates Phylogeny by Lionel Tiger, Charles Darwin Professor of Anthropology at Rutgers University
The premise here is that our values are rooted deeply in our biological as well as cultural past. “We can begin with Joseph Conrad’ formulation in Heart of Darkness that ‘The mind of man is capable of anything – because anything is in it, all the past as well as all the future.’…the earlier and more general the pattern was in the past the more likely it is to find some expression in the present.” (P 320) Although variations occur within populations over time, the essential purpose of variation is individual and species preservation. Variation leads to greater adaptability to changes within populations but they still need to be able to be genetically similar enough to allow mating and thus preserve the species. Most of our physical characteristics and behavioral patterns developed in a world far different from the one we live in today. Our ancestors were primarily agricultural up until a few generations ago and before that we evolved to be successful as hunters and gatherers – both as individuals and as societies. Regarding values: “The Buddhist, Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, Confucian, Islamic, and Hindu formulations are essentially products of small farmers and shepherds. Yet these are the preeminent ethical and value systems that underlie legal systems and that currently operate the planet.” (P 321) Nevertheless, “…the role of cultural patterns is to ensure some predictable and reliable amount of inter-individual coherence and similarity.” (P 328)