What is the difference between a value judgment and a fact (description vs prescription)
in [Math]
|
Prev: 0-1 knapsack problem: uniqueness of optimal solutions
Next: If Economics is one of the "Soft Sciences" how can it betrusted determine so much in society?
From: BOfL on 17 Jul 2010 00:18 On Jul 16, 9:10 pm, Zinnic <zeenr...(a)gate.net> wrote: > On Jul 16, 6:54 am, "Daniel T." <danie...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Immortalista <extro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > I see many people try and disguise a value judgment as some sort of > > > fact or just a value free description. How can one tell when someone > > > is explaining some facts or just trying you to get interested in what > > > he or she likes? You know, how some people insist that it is factual > > > that certain kinds of music is better than others. > > > > Value judgements include > > > statements about what is > > > good and what people > > > ought to do. > > > > They contrast with statements > > > of fact, whose acceptance > > > does not (necessarily) > > > entail action. > > > > 'It is raining' is merely factual. 'You ought not to hit that child' > > > implies a value judgement. One way of putting this is that value > > > statements are prescriptive, not purely descriptive (Hare 1963). > > > > Another terminology is that; > > > > value statements are practical, > > > while purely factual statements > > > are theoretical (Quinton 1973). > > > > Programs of the brain. > > > J. Z. Young 1978 > > >http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0198575459/ > > > What about "that smells nice" and "that smells bad"? > > > It turns out that these are not value judgments at all, they are > > statements of fact. (http://www.pnas.org/content/97/20/10712.full) > > > Who's to say how many more of these so-called value judgements will fall > > to science?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Many will judge that molecular conformation of receptor sites have no > philosopical value and that's a fact. They dismiss 'hard' science and > prefer self-serving 'easy' speculation. :-)- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - For a brief time in the 90's I was involved with a perfume cloning business based in the US where the combination of scientific understanding of the molecular structure, and gas chromatography allowed 'identical' outcomes (to within the human olfactory sensitivity). Based on the science, a clear road into the $6bill annual market in the US (plus superb presentation and marketing.) What wasnt taken into account was the 'philosphical factor' regarding the attitude and mentality of the potential customer, and as a consequence (in the world of crossover realities),many lost their shirts. BOfL
From: BOfL on 17 Jul 2010 00:21 On Jul 17, 7:10 am, "Daniel T." <danie...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > jigo <reti...(a)home.com> wrote: > > Daniel T. wrote: > > > Immortalista <extro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I see many people try and disguise a value judgment as some sort > > > > of fact or just a value free description. How can one tell when > > > > someone is explaining some facts or just trying you to get > > > > interested in what he or she likes? You know, how some people > > > > insist that it is factual that certain kinds of music is better > > > > than others. > > > > > Value judgements include statements about what is good and what > > > > people ought to do. > > > > > They contrast with statements of fact, whose acceptance does not > > > > (necessarily) entail action. > > > > > 'It is raining' is merely factual. 'You ought not to hit that > > > > child' implies a value judgement. One way of putting this is that > > > > value statements are prescriptive, not purely descriptive (Hare > > > > 1963). > > > > > Another terminology is that; > > > > > value statements are practical, while purely factual statements > > > > are theoretical (Quinton 1973). > > > > > Programs of the brain. J. Z. Young 1978 > > > >http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0198575459/ > > > > What about "that smells nice" and "that smells bad"? > > > > It turns out that these are not value judgments at all, they are > > > statements of fact. (http://www.pnas.org/content/97/20/10712.full) > > > > Who's to say how many more of these so-called value judgements will > > > fall to science? > > > Smelling nice or bad are questions of fact depending on the > > characteristics of the smeller. That is subjective but still has a > > factual answer; it's different in kind from questions of "should." > > "Should" assumes a goal, given a particular goal, it is generally quite > objective as to what actions will further that goal and what actions > will not.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Yes, but the value outcome of such goals can never be anticipated accurately. BOfL
From: BOfL on 17 Jul 2010 00:23 On Jul 17, 7:21 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 16, 4:11 am, Zerkon <Z...(a)erkonx.net> wrote: > > > On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 20:17:11 -0700, Immortalista wrote: > > > I see many people try and disguise a value judgment as some sort of fact > > > ... > > > > Programs of the brain. > > > LOL!! > > Well, it is an old old book, but I read it two times the first feww > days after it was released in 1978. At the time some anthropology > books were becoming like the religion of nature and humanity, and this > was one of the first brain books that followed suite. Then E.O. Wilson > came out with the end all of anthro religions; On Human Nature > > http://www.amazon.com/Human-Nature-Edward-O-Wilson/dp/067463442X > > Then Harris ended the very idea with this one which no one could beat > from then on as a religion of nature and human. > > http://www.amazon.com/Our-Kind-Where-Came-Going/dp/0060919906/ > > Most important books but now they are disappearing from public > libraries, time goes on and humans suffer cultural amnesia.. Not amnesia, but an increaed requirement for selective recall,otherwise we would all be savants. BOfL
From: BOfL on 17 Jul 2010 00:28 On Jul 16, 7:54 pm, "Daniel T." <danie...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > Immortalista <extro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > I see many people try and disguise a value judgment as some sort of > > fact or just a value free description. How can one tell when someone > > is explaining some facts or just trying you to get interested in what > > he or she likes? You know, how some people insist that it is factual > > that certain kinds of music is better than others. > > > Value judgements include > > statements about what is > > good and what people > > ought to do. > > > They contrast with statements > > of fact, whose acceptance > > does not (necessarily) > > entail action. > > > 'It is raining' is merely factual. 'You ought not to hit that child' > > implies a value judgement. One way of putting this is that value > > statements are prescriptive, not purely descriptive (Hare 1963). > > > Another terminology is that; > > > value statements are practical, > > while purely factual statements > > are theoretical (Quinton 1973). > > > Programs of the brain. > > J. Z. Young 1978 > >http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0198575459/ > > What about "that smells nice" and "that smells bad"? > > It turns out that these are not value judgments at all, they are > statements of fact. (http://www.pnas.org/content/97/20/10712.full) > > Who's to say how many more of these so-called value judgements will fall > to science?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Scince can identify a reaction, but never a subjective interpretation...ie 'nice'. Animals use their sense of smell for survival moment to moment. They dont consider 'nice' , they just eat it or leave it instinctively. BOfL
From: Zinnic on 17 Jul 2010 06:15
On Jul 16, 11:28 pm, BOfL <bigflet...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 16, 7:54 pm, "Daniel T." <danie...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Immortalista <extro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > I see many people try and disguise a value judgment as some sort of > > > fact or just a value free description. How can one tell when someone > > > is explaining some facts or just trying you to get interested in what > > > he or she likes? You know, how some people insist that it is factual > > > that certain kinds of music is better than others. > > > > Value judgements include > > > statements about what is > > > good and what people > > > ought to do. > > > > They contrast with statements > > > of fact, whose acceptance > > > does not (necessarily) > > > entail action. > > > > 'It is raining' is merely factual. 'You ought not to hit that child' > > > implies a value judgement. One way of putting this is that value > > > statements are prescriptive, not purely descriptive (Hare 1963). > > > > Another terminology is that; > > > > value statements are practical, > > > while purely factual statements > > > are theoretical (Quinton 1973). > > > > Programs of the brain. > > > J. Z. Young 1978 > > >http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0198575459/ > > > What about "that smells nice" and "that smells bad"? > > > It turns out that these are not value judgments at all, they are > > statements of fact. (http://www.pnas.org/content/97/20/10712.full) > > > Who's to say how many more of these so-called value judgements will fall > > to science?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Scince can identify a reaction, but never a subjective > interpretation...ie 'nice'. Animals use their sense of smell for > survival moment to moment. They dont consider 'nice' , they just eat > it or leave it instinctively. > Yeah! Your insight seems inexhaustible. So now animals do not smell "nice! What next? Obviously, you have observed and long studied how, given a choice, foraging animals do not show preference for the "nicer" tender shoots and predatory animals do not show preference for the "nicer" soft tissues of their prey! Aargh! |