Ethics: Realism, Value, and the Grounding of Moral Value

Realism, Anti-Realism, and the Ontology of Value in Ethics

• Debate overview from the transcript:

  • Moral realism vs anti-realism: Realists hold that moral value and moral necessity have objective, mind-independent reality; moral sentences are truth-apt (true or false). Anti-realists deny objective reality to moral values and claim moral sentences are non-truth-apt or cannot be truthfully true/false.
  • The goal of the discussion: determine which view is correct by examining value, moral necessity, and moral statements.
  • Method: start with value, then address whether moral value and moral necessity are objective, and whether moral sentences are truth-apt.

• Key positions summarized:

  • Realists: ethical value and ethical necessity are objective; ethical sentences are capable of truth-values independent of human conventions.
  • Non-realists: ethical value and ethical necessity lack objective reality; ethical sentences are not truth-apt in the same sense.
  • The session aims to clarify the implications and where the debate connects to broader issues (foundational ethics, practical ethics, law, politics, etc.).

• The scope of value (broad notion, beyond ethics):

  • Value appears in many domains: economics, aesthetics, epistemology, logic, social life, history, politics, and law.
  • Examples across domains:
  • Economic value: how much something is worth in the market (purchase power, exchange value, use value).
  • Artistic value: the aesthetic or cultural worth of a work (e.g., a painting).
  • Epistemic value: the desirability/strength of a belief (e.g., a belief’s justificational strength; e.g., probability of being true).
  • Logical value: truth-value of propositions (true vs false).
  • Social, historical, political, and legal values: the acceptability or authority of institutions, documents, or norms.

• Value in economics (types and distinctions):

  • Intrinsic (essential) value: goods themselves have value in virtue of what they are (e.g., money, land, goods) and can be valuable independently of their use as means.
  • Extrinsic (instrumental) value: value derived from the thing’s capacity to bring about other valued states or goods (e.g., an activity’s value because it produces wealth, even if the activity itself is not valuable in itself).
  • Distinction between end-state value and instrumental value: some things are valuable ends in themselves; others are valuable mainly as means to other ends.
  • Use value vs exchange value (economic concepts):
  • Use value: value derived from the usefulness of a good.
  • Exchange value: value of a good in the market (its price).
  • The argument that while money, goods, and land may have intrinsic value in economics, many valuable outcomes come from the activities that generate wealth (the activities themselves often have instrumental value).

• Value in economics: the four notions outlined

  • 1) Intrinsic value (ارزش ذاتی): the value a thing has independently of anything else; its value does not depend on other objects or outcomes.
  • 2) Extrinsic/value that depends on something else (ارزش غیرذاتی): the value of something is grounded in its relation to another desirable end or outcome.
  • 3) Absolute vs relative value (ارزش جایگزینی): when two options both have value, the comparison can yield an evaluative judgment of which to choose; the notion of opportunity cost arises when choosing between mutually exclusive valuable options.
  • 4) Substitutability value (ارزش جایگزینی): in a choice between competing valuable options, the option with higher extrinsic value to achieve the preferred outcome is the one that should be chosen; the other option has the “substitution value” in that context.

• Application to ethics: aligning economic notions with moral evaluation

  • In ethics, one asks: what is the main good or end, and how do various moral goods derive value?
  • If a single telos (end) is identified, other moral considerations gain value insofar as they contribute to achieving that end.
  • The discussion raises whether the criteria of desirability are culturally relative or potentially universal; values may be described as social or cultural, yet the notion of desirability itself does not automatically fix a universal standard of objectivity.
  • The notion of value in ethics can be categorized similarly: intrinsic moral value vs extrinsic moral value; the latter being instrumental for attaining the intrinsic good.

• The ethics-specific view of value (intrinsic vs extrinsic in moral life)

  • The ultimate end in ethics is human perfection (كمال انسانی), which is identified as having intrinsic value.
  • Moral actions and traits that facilitate the achievement of this ultimate end have extrinsic (dependent) value with respect to the end, while those that constitute or directly express the end have intrinsic value.
  • The origin of desirability (moral motivation) is traced to human nature and the will, particularly through the origin of desire in intentional agents.

• The origin of all desires in ethical life: حب الذات (love of self)

  • All volitional actions ultimately trace back to love of self and the desire for self-perfection.
  • This love of self is presented as the ultimate ground of all voluntary motives, including moral ones; it is described as a necessary, not optional, aspect of human nature and moral psychology.
  • The grounding of the good in self-love leads to a final cause (سبب غایی) that anchors the chain of motives; this final cause cannot be infinitely regressive and must terminate in a necessary, ultimate good (often conceived as the attainment of perfection of the rational being).
  • The discussion notes: in theology, God’s actions are explained as arising from perfected perfections; for created beings, motives stem from the presence or absence of certain goods.

• The grounding of intrinsic moral value (in ethics) and the role of will

  • Intrinsic moral value in ethics is identified with the intrinsic desirability of the ultimate end (the perfection of the human person).
  • Extrinsic moral value arises from the role of actions and traits in facilitating the achievement of that intrinsic end.
  • Describing the relation between actions/traits and the end: actions that directly contribute to self-perfection have intrinsic value; those that contribute to self-perfection do so extrinsically.
  • The role of dispositions (صفات) in ethics: dispositions influence behavior and thus influence the path toward the end; they also have value status (intrinsic and/or extrinsic) depending on their relation to the end and to the action.

• The status of traits (صفات) and their value in ethics

  • Traits are the driving forces behind behavior; they provide motivational energy and shape actions.
  • In ethics, many traits have extrinsic value because they influence whether the agent attains the ultimate good.
  • Some traits may possess intrinsic value as well (depending on their direct contribution to the end), while others are primarily instrumental.
  • Some dispositions can also have intrinsic value in their own right, while still influencing the achievement of moral ends; others are primarily instrumental.

• The claim that ethical value is real and objective

  • The text argues that: when evaluating the impact of actions and traits on the attainment of the moral end, the causal and evaluative relations are real; thus ethical value (both intrinsic and extrinsic) is an objective matter, not merely subjective opinion.
  • The intrinsic value of moral excellences (kamaal-e-akhli) is grounded in the ultimate end of human perfection; the extrinsic value of actions and traits is grounded in their instrumental role in achieving that end.
  • Therefore, all varieties of ethical value are real and objective (واقعیت عینی) rather than merely subjective or conventional.

• Connections to other areas and implications

  • The discussion links moral value to other domains by analogy (economic value and substitution, use vs exchange value) but reinterprets them within the ethical center: the ultimate end remains moral perfection, and all other values are evaluated in relation to that end.
  • This framework supports the view that ethics has a grounded, objective scale of value, even if the content of what is valued (the concrete ends or virtues) may be culturally influenced in its specifics.

• Preview of next topics

  • The next session will address the reality of moral necessity (لزوم اخلاقی) and provide further arguments about whether moral requirements are objective.
  • Aimed at clarifying how intrinsic and extrinsic moral values relate to the obligations we ought to follow.

• Quick reference to key terms (for study):

  • Moral realism vs anti-realism in ethics
  • Value (ارزش): desirability, worth, or goodness across domains
  • intrinsic value (ارزش ذاتی) vs extrinsic value (ارزش غیری)
  • ارزش جایگزینی (substitutability value / opportunity cost)
  • Use value vs exchange value in economics
  • Positive, negative, and zero value (ارزش مثبت، منفی، صفر) relative to a standard of desirability
  • Final cause (علت غایی) and love of self (حب ذات) as ground of motivation
  • Kamaal-e-akhli (human perfection) as intrinsic moral value
  • صفات نفسانی (psychological dispositional traits) as sources of behavior and their value status

• Notes on structure and interpretation

  • The notes distinguish between value as a descriptive/desirability relation and value as a foundational property of objects or acts.
  • The ethical framework presented treats value as functioning both descriptively (what is valued) and normatively (why it is valued and how it ought to influence action).
  • The approach emphasizes that even if evaluative judgments can be informed by culture, the claim that moral value is grounded in objective reality is defended by arguing for real causal connections between actions/traits and the attainment of the moral end.

• Quick reminder for exam focus

  • Be clear on the distinction between intrinsic vs extrinsic value in ethics and how each relates to the ultimate end (human perfection).
  • Understand the grounding of motivation in love of self and how this grounds both desires and the normative status of moral actions.
  • Be able to articulate the argument that ethical value is real/objective, not merely a matter of opinion or social convention, and know how this connects to the discussion of final causes and dispositions.
  • Recognize and explain the analogies to economics (use value vs exchange value) while noting their limitations in ethics.