Humanity suffers in part due to its inability to unite absolute, ethical codes and relative values assigned subjectively by humans.

Values are defined as internal references of what humans consider good or bad, desirable or undesirable.

The field of axiology, or study of value, has long been a pillar of philosophical inquiry.

Since the earliest days of theologians, prophets, religious scholars, and philosophers of ethics to the formulation of the Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Convention, humanity has sought to construct a universally shared framework of moral conduct and principles that could be applied across time and space.

Can values truly be absolute when they are assigned differently by humans to objects and realities?

If values are subjective, could ethics still be applied in an objective manner?

Just like many other words, the term “value/s” carries more than one meaning in dictionaries.

One interpretation conflates values with ethics, essentially referring to moral values and principles, often seeking the absolute and universal. This interpretation has historically been driven by religious worldviews and societal norms.

However, values can also be defined more generally, with ethics being considered a subset type of value.

This wider interpretation has often been tied to the concept of value as a good, as a utility that can reflect a tangible or intangible asset humans are willing to expend energy or trade resources to obtain.

Today, work in value theory has been developed by examining the decisions of humans and inferring what they do value based on the outcomes of their decisions.

There are economic, psychological, and anthropological models that have been built trying to understand value, which is an omnipresent feature of our daily lives in which we often subconsciously participate in.

This represents a scientific continuation of the philosophical practice of Greeks seeking to define “the good”, renowned for being some of the first to develop systems of rational thought denoting which of two comparable activities, properties, or qualities is the higher, better, nobler or more perfect.

Traditionally, philosophers held that an entity has intrinsic value if it is good in itself, meaning it is inherently rewarding and provides its own utility. Intrinsic value is contrasted with extrinsic or instrumental value, which is ascribed to things that are valuable only as a means to something else, for example money or industrial machinery.