The Spirit in Man and Society

Values and Ideals

Values constitute an essential part of human spirituality. While the everyday use of the term "values" tends to orient toward a world of treasures, as a philosophical concept, value more accurately points to the realm of spirituality while still retaining its material aspect. The first to draw attention to values were representatives of German philosophy. Immanuel Kant distinguished between relative and absolute values, focusing particularly on the value dimension of norms and goals. Heinrich Rickert placed the problem of values at the very center of any philosophical inquiry, positing that philosophy explores a world of values that creates "a completely independent realm lying beyond subject and object," an ideal, eternal world that exists independently of humanity.

Friedrich Nietzsche also engaged with this theme, proclaiming the necessity of a "reevaluation of all values," particularly those rooted in Christianity. Another German philosopher, Max Scheler, a figure in the philosophical anthropology of the 20th century, wrote extensively about values in their hierarchical relations.

In the 20th century, this theme emerged as one of the most widespread in the entire spiritual life of humanity, not least due to the profound upheavals caused by world wars, revolutions, and the ideological confrontations of social systems during the "Cold War." Today, the issue of values remains pertinent, especially in societies undergoing economic and political crises or that have, to some extent, lost their bearings in complex international relations. When there are values shared by the majority, they become a crucial factor for the integration of a specific society or humanity as a whole. Conversely, chaos in the realm of values often signals a crisis, deeply affecting the everyday worldview of individuals and large social groups.

Defining the concept of value is not a straightforward task. Some authors addressing this topic begin with the meanings suggested by language itself. The Russian philosopher V. P. Tugarinov, who was the first among Soviet Marxists to tackle the problem of values, defined this key concept as follows: "Values are objects, phenomena, and their properties that are necessary for people... as means of satisfying their needs and interests, as well as ideas and impulses serving as norms, goals, and ideals." During discussions of the time and in current literature, some lean towards defining the concept of value as the significance of phenomena as orientations for human activity. Tugarinov opposed this view, arguing that significance can carry both positive and negative connotations, while language protests against such violence; thus, the concept of values should only be associated with positive significance. He believed that the concept of value is nearly identical to the concept of good, with the distinction stemming from the fact that the concept of good reflects the objective side more, while the concept of value reflects the subjective side. The implication is that good is something beautiful and useful, whereas when viewed from the perspective of value, emphasis is placed on the appreciation of good by people.

The contemporary Russian author D. A. Leontiev, also drawing from the meanings suggested by language, identified two possible directions in interpreting "value." First, value can be understood as the belonging of a quality (value) to certain objects, making the term "significance" appropriate, which serves as a source for the existence of value judgments based on the evaluation of objects in light of this quality. Second, value can refer to the objects themselves as values. In the first interpretation, the concept of value does not introduce anything new compared to the concepts of needs and interests, while in the second, it reflects a specific reality that cannot be derived from needs (e.g., norms, the meaning of life, etc.). This author also points to three forms in which values exist: social ideals, materially embodied values, and personal values.

It seems that in the provided examples of the analysis of the concept of values, there are quite sensible considerations that should be taken into account when clarifying all nuances of its meaning. To this end, it is essential to consider the mechanisms of human activity, its motives, and incentives, among which values hold a significant place. It is well known that needs transform into interests, and interests into values, which in turn stimulate human activity. It is also important to note that the value-related attitude towards the world differs from both the productive-practical and scientific-cognitive approaches. In the latter case, an objectivist approach prevails, where the subject seeks to study the object as it exists in itself. However, in a value-oriented approach, a person examines phenomena not as they are in themselves, but as they are for the person, thus linking value to evaluation.

Ultimately, consciously avoiding a definitive characterization of the concept of values—since any definition would preemptively limit the breadth and multidimensionality of its contemporary usage—let us summarize the semantic aspects of this concept. The term value can be employed to denote the presence of a corresponding quality in something. This meaning is felt when characterizing objects and phenomena as having "value" or being "valuable." Clearly, in this context, "value" is not a quality that can be captured by the senses. Among a series of physical, chemical, and other natural properties of objects, there is no place for an additional property—value. Things, in conjunction with their natural qualities, acquire a value-laden character only when they can satisfy human needs and interests. Therefore, things become valuable to us, rather than possessing a value quality by nature; they inherently possess physical, chemical, and other properties.

The term value may also refer to those components of our spirituality that reflect a specific attitude of people towards natural, social, and spiritual phenomena in terms of their significance. In this sense, "values" represent an ordered spiritual complex that motivates human activity and defines the strategy of their lives. Thus, in the first case, we direct the concept of values towards the qualities of things and phenomena, while in the second, we focus on the characteristics of the person—the subject of value-related attitudes towards things and phenomena.

In the process of socialization (education and upbringing), a system of value representations is formed within each individual. Such a system may be largely fragmented or may be holistic, oriented towards certain important, fundamental values. Based on these value representations, the value orientations of the individual are established. They represent a blend of the rational and the emotional, regulating human activity (setting its vector) in the most significant situations. Within the system of value orientations, a person's attitude towards the goals of life and the means of achieving them becomes apparent.

In every epoch and within each significant socio-historical group, specific types of value orientations are produced, which receive philosophical and ethical justification. Among these, we can point to the following:

1. Eudaimonism (from Greek ευδαιμονία - happiness). According to this view, the attainment of happiness is the highest criterion of virtue and simultaneously the foundation of moral actions. The French Enlightenment thinkers of the 18th century believed that the pursuit of happiness is a natural trait of humanity, making happiness the ultimate and final goal for every individual and society.
2. Hedonism (from Greek ηδονη - pleasure) reduces the entirety of moral demands to a singular aim: to seek pleasure and avoid suffering. The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus, who was the first to specifically justify a hedonistic approach to life, did not advocate for a vulgar pursuit of pleasure at any cost. He spoke of a measure of pleasure in life that succeeds in avoiding painful consequences.
3. Asceticism (from Greek άσκησις - exercise, physical strain for the appropriate cultivation of body and spirit) justifies and promotes abstention, the renunciation of all pleasures and worldly goods; it is often associated with religious teachings on morality, espousing self-denial and the struggle against the temptations of the sinful body. Asceticism has been known since ancient times in both the East and the West. In medieval Europe, it was supported by the Catholic Church and propagated through the orders of mendicant monks, particularly the Franciscans, followers of Francis of Assisi (1182-1226).
4. Utilitarianism (from Latin utilitas - utility) gained justification in the 19th century in England, where the most notable advocate was Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). According to utilitarianism, the aim of moral activity is to achieve the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

Each of these types of value orientations has found its adherents as well as its critical detractors; the arguments "for" and "against" are abundant in the extensive literature on moral philosophy, to which the reader may be referred. Here, I will merely make a general observation. It is evident that the aforementioned and unmentioned types of value orientations share a common foundation, united by an orientation towards the good, happiness, and so forth. They differ, however, in their emphases and the selection of particular doctrinal motives as ethical aims of actions and conduct.

Value orientations also find their collective expression in ideals. An ideal serves as a model, a general reference point that determines the activity and behavior of individuals (or groups) in various spheres of social life, or indeed their entire existence. Within ideals, higher norms of perfection and pathways to achieving them are formed. These norms and ideals include concepts such as freedom, justice, equality, beauty, harmony, and wisdom. Evaluating the role of ideals in human life, Immanuel Kant wrote: "The human mind contains not only ideas but also ideals, which, though they may not have a creative power like Platonic ideals, still possess a practical force (as regulative principles) and underlie the possibility of the perfection of certain actions... Virtue, together with human wisdom in all its purity, constitutes ideas. Yet the wise person (Stoics) is an ideal, that is, a person that exists only in thought but entirely corresponds to the idea of wisdom. Just as an idea provides a rule, so an ideal serves as a model for fully defining its copies; and we have no other measure for our actions than the behavior of this divine person within us, with whom we compare ourselves, evaluate, and thereby improve, even though we can never quite equal them."

Certain ideals are held by all people. There exist shared ideals that large groups of individuals endorse, yet there may also be unique ideals that belong to specific individuals or groups. Furthermore, we can speak of true and false, positive and negative ideals; some are constructive, leading to personal development and refinement, while others are destructive and detrimental to both individuals and society. Some individuals are capable of shaping progressive ideals, while others are consciously and stubbornly inclined to defend negative ones. However, the majority of ordinary people navigate a world of ideals, adhering to templates, trends, and the principle of "being like everyone else." It is advantageous if these "everyone" are moving in the right direction. In a transitional society, however, the role of a personal, reasoned stance increases significantly, as thoughtful individuals approach the choice of ideals with a sense of responsibility regarding their own lives and the fate of the state.