Introduction
Societies are defined by social and cultural constructs that embody the law of nature in which morality is fundamentally entrenched in the form of values and ethics . The modern day society is characterized by immense losses and confusion. There are numerous cases of conflicts and wars, and countless vicious incidents covering the globe (Hauser, 2006). Some of these include kidnapping, alcoholism, terrorism, family breakdown, corruption, drug abuse, conspiracy, arson, oppression and depreciating sexual ethics. In the center of all this is the most important possession for humans. These are the loss of faith and belief among individuals, the decline in the authority wielded by parents and other agencies such as the government and the teachers. This, in the long run, leads to the loss of dignity among individuals, the traditions being disregarded and life having no dignity.
Therefore, the study of these values and/or ethics is referred to as axiology, a philosophical concept that dwells on notions of worth. According to Edwards (2010), axiology is essential for the identification of general patterns that embody the meaning of good and related concepts in terms of what is valued, and how it is valued. Ethics and aesthetics are the main discourse studied in axiology. The former refers to the investigation of concepts of right and wrong in relation to individual and social behavior; while the later encapsulates concepts of beauty and harmony (Johnson, 2008). Under circumstances where the science of value is involved, the phenomenon is often referred to as “formal axiology” because of its attempts at using mathematical rigor to lay out principles regarding value. According to Schroeder (2008), value is “a quality of an object that satisfies a desire of the subject.” So, axiology is dependent on recognizing the existence of the difference in society’s approach to law and morality, espoused in the belief of the vital connection between knowledge and value that establishes causality relationship between morality and democracy. The hypothesis of value, so understood, includes axiology, although it also encompasses numerous other questions concerning value’s nature and its connection to the rest of the moral classes. Axiology may be considered as, first and foremost, concerned with the classification of things that are good, and the way in which such things are considered good (Hauser, 2006). For example, a conventional axiology question concerns with whether the value objects are prejudiced psychological situations or are they objective to the universe.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Critical Issues Surrounding Theory of Value
One does not have to dig deeper to realize that the world is consumed by a cancer whose immedicable symptoms of confusion and loss are manifestations of irremediable wars and civil unrests that have robbed humanity of its morals. The contemporary era is defined by miasmic acts of terrorism, drug abuse, murder, destruction, sexual abuse, injustices, the breakdown in family norms, oppression, corruption, and slander among others that indicate humanity adoption of survival through natural instincts, where competition for the scarce resources favors those who are comparatively superior (Edwards, 2010). There is significant loss of mutual trust among people exacerbated by the perceived decline in institutionalized authority among parents, teachers, and the government, and subsequent neglect of personal dignity, traditions and culture, and the loss of regard for human life and welfare. Under the circumstances, it is critical to bring into focus the collaborative efforts of process philosophy and formal axiology as a means of introducing, much needed order and clarity in the thought process while inferring to definitions of aspects that are good, better, or best in relation to things perceived to be intrinsically good, and the nature and value of individuals who can endure (Edwards, 2009).
The above scenario calls for apprenticing the young generation into relevant constellations of meaning to enable them to endure and exercise values and morals that epitomize human dignity. This highlights the role of axiology in pedagogical discourses, that for some time, exiled values through “value-free education” that have proven to be impossible and undesirable for use for inculcating values in children who are the only hope of saving humanity from self-destruction (Johnson, 2008). The claims are founded on the concept of the unification of thought in which axiology is given a central role to as the foundation for education, arts, and ethics, required to develop a truthful, beautiful, and good society respectively. The approach will not only inculcate values, but also provide a framework for their definition, determination, and standards, elements of undoubted importance in the modern society in facilitating peaceful coexistence (Hauser, 2006).
Argument For and Against Axiology
The concepts of axiology and value theory draw criticism for their perceived lack of clarity in definition, which creates confusion in implementation. According to Schroeder (2008) the term value theory is applicable in at least three dimensions as a catch all label that encompasses all fields of moral, social, and political philosophy, aesthetics, feminine, and religious philosophy. This is the broader evaluative approach of axiology. In its narrowest sense, Schroeder (2008) posits that axiology value theory applies to a narrow normative area of ethical theory that is of specific interest to consequentialists but not in its entirety. However, the use of axiology to judge what is good and how good it is has failed to espouse the very concept that it advocates for.
According to Hauser (2006) and Johnson (2008), axiology fails to recognize idealists’ perception where God is the central being who is the form of forms; the absolute mind, and the absolute self. Therefore, behaving ethically implies conformity to God through the universal moral law, and education, art, and ethics can only be seen as truthful, beautiful, and good through the eyes of this Supreme Being. One can argue that adoption of this idealists’ approach can be effective in addressing the current rot in the world where disregard for human law is a common phenomenon (Schroeder, 2008). The evident collapse of ethics, values, and morals that characterize humanity is attributed to exclusion of a sense of God in the field of politics, society, education, economic, and arts, that have neglected religion. The universal moral law of “do to others what you would want done unto you” is losing significance amidst the emergence of materialism secularism, and atheism that continue to infiltrate the society spreading viewpoints of communism that undermine traditional values. These developments, according to Hauser (2006) and Johnson (2008), are an indication of the failure of axiology in its pedagogical role.
Response to Arguments
The argument that axiology epitomizes a suitable framework for understanding value and values by Schroeder (2008), is valid because the concept adopts different approaches to illustrate what social and moral value and values embody. The definition of values based on the unification of thought is crucial in providing individuals with a reference point of their social, moral, and ethical obligations. However, the emphasis on value theory as a component of axiology application of other philosophies including the religious philosophy that Hauser (2006) and Johnson (2008) argue to be an embodiment of the universal moral law where God is the supreme and right and wrong are under their jurisdiction. This argument is valid in the context of the modern scientifically informed society. Religious traditional beliefs often contradict with scientific ones, hence the need for a new and fresh perspective to facilitate adequate preparation for the ideal world in the future. Contractarianism, which blends religion and science by emphasizing on the need to enter into social contracts, may present an attractive option for both sides because it provides common ground by defining what is right and wrong in the context of a given society.
Conclusion
Axiology is an essential concept for understanding what is right and what is wrong because it defines values based on the context of the society. However, currently, the world is consumed by moral, social, and ethical decay that threatens the fundamentality of human existence. The value theory holds no water in the face of recent developments that justify the need for societies defined by social and cultural constructs that embody the law of nature in which morality is fundamentally entrenched in the form of values and ethics .
However, the upcoming society would that which values such as beauty, goodness and trueness would be acknowledged (Hauser, 2006). Also, such a society would be economically successful due to the innovations and advancements in science. Individuals would direct their efforts to the realization and attaining of values that change the society and their lives positively. As such, a society that focuses on attaining values of goodness, trueness and beauty would prosper definitely.
References
Edwards, R. B. (2009). People and their worth. Process Studies , 38 (1), 43-68.
Edwards, R. B. (2010). The essentials of axiology . ISBN: 9780761852902
Hauser, M. D. (2006, August). Moral minds: How nature designed our universal sense of right and wrong. New York: Ecco.
Johnson, R. (2008). Kant's moral philosophy. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy .
Schroeder, M. (2008).Value theory. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Retrieved on 22 November 2016 from: http://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/entries/value-theory/.
