# What values are

A value is a mental group we've assigned in our mind, a bit like a "box" we've placed around something. It's always something we perceive, even if it's related to [reality](reality.md) around us.

When people say they *believe* in values, they actually mean they believe in [*good* values](morality.md) or in [quality](values-quality.md).

All ideas and thoughts use values:

- The values can sometimes be of tangible things or can be completely abstract (also known as "principles").
- Values driven by [perceptions](image.md) are considered [qualities](values-quality.md), while values that [group things together](symbols.md) are called [quantity](math.md).
- We can mix-and-match values in innumerable combinations with other values to create every possible idea.

The [power](power.md) of those ideas in our minds heavily determines how [certain](understanding-certainty.md) we are of them, and our [feelings](mind-feelings.md) are closely connected to that certainty. Those feelings directly structure how we interpret [reality](reality.md) and what we must [do](purpose.md), which creates a type of holistic feedback loop over [time](datetime.md).

We use [language](language.md) to [communicate](people-conversation.md) those values back and forth, but we store those values as [feeling](mind-feelings.md)-based [stories](stories.md) in our brains that use language as a reference and [trigger](habits.md).

APPLICATION: Our [feelings-based](mind-feelings.md) approach to values means we never find [meaning](meaning.md) in [quantities](math.md) unless we've assigned some special significance to the comparative aspect of those numbers with other numbers. Otherwise, all meaning is contained in [quality](values-quality.md).

## The source of values

Values are *not* [reality](reality.md), and are merely synthesized and processed [adaptations](creations.md) of reality. They're abstract [patterns](symbols.md) that exist only in our minds as commentaries *on* reality. Things like "[car](autos.md)", "[relationship](people-4_friends.md)", "[trust](trust.md)", "[political system](politics-systems.md)" *do* exist beyond our minds, but in some other form than we can perceive. The idea of "car" or "trust" as a fabrication is the one that's actually [shared with other people](humanity-universals.md).

APPLICATION: We can only determine if a value is [real](reality.md) by constantly exposing it to the world around us, mostly through [language](awareness.md) but through all forms of [creation](creations.md).

APPLICATION: The [smarter](personality.md) a person is, the more likely they will derive values that deviate from truth. While intelligence is a [type of power](power-types.md), it's an inherent structural weakness, and part of why so many [creative and brilliant](mind-creativity.md) people are also mentally ill.

All values are based on some form of [authority](power.md) that defines their existence, and we must [trust](trust.md) that thing legitimately exists.

The easiest way to distinguish between what we have in our minds versus the world around us is to observe what other non-human animals perceive. If an animal (e.g., a dog or tarantula) can perceive it, it's more likely something in reality. Otherwise, it's a construct that's strictly human-made.

We use [language](language.md) to understand these values. By speaking or writing them, we can [understand](understanding.md) them more clearly. We gain power over the [unknown](unknown.md) simply by giving it a name.

We frequently define those values through something that broke from a [pattern](symbols.md) we were perceiving (e.g., a red line on a white piece of paper generates a [story](stories.md) about a red line).

We presume these abstractions are reality because we frequently [share parts of them with other people](humanity-universals.md). We build them by combining our perceptions of [reality](reality.md) with our previous [understanding](understanding.md).

The perceptions we make are *also* made of values, so our minds are vast structures of clumps of values, one on top of another, assembled through [associations](https://gainedin.site/networks/) through [feelings](mind-feelings.md) and [past understanding](understanding.md). They become less reliable the further we get from [actual](reality.md) perceptions, which is easier in proportion to [our intelligence](personality.md).

While we can extract values indefinitely from an original experience, they're never *entirely* divorced from it. We always end up [imagining](imagination.md) the original thing we experienced as part of the abstraction. Thus, we always keep those values connected to an example, no matter [how intelligent we are](personality.md) or how much we [philosophize](philosophy.md).

APPLICATION: Since we all understand values in a wobbly-pseudo-accurate state, the idea that values don't move around even while people do (i.e., [Plato's assertion](philosophy.md)) is patently wrong. We can definitely become [habituated](habits.md) to certain values, but that's only the *illusion* of consistency.

We [understand](understanding.md) values and ideas to the proportion of [quality](values-quality.md) we can [create](creations.md) with them. Effective [teachers](education.md) and [popular](trends.md) depictions of an idea are demonstrating the most elegant understanding of something, since they've successfully [communicated](language.md) something elaborate in plain terms.

## The use of values

We only assemble values together when we have a [purpose](purpose.md) for it, which usually associates with or against something we [love](people-love.md). We assemble values into new values, then treat those values as a base value for something else, and it can repeat as much as we need.

Further, we don't often consider how our values differ from [reality](reality.md). Our derived values never exist in reality beyond our minds. All that technically exists beyond the mind are the [creations](creations.md) we [build](results.md).

Values are inherently useless alone inside our thoughts (e.g., labels like "oceans" and "seas" don't exist beyond the mind), but are the framework for what we end up doing (e.g., we [navigate](logistics-navigation.md) ships by using labels like "oceans" and "seas").

Therefore, for values to be useful, they must fulfill several simultaneous criteria:

1. Based on [reality](reality.md).
2. Socially [constructive](results.md).
3. Immediate and [controllable](people-decisions.md).
4. Free of any general aspects that could lead to [confusion](image-distortion.md) or [uncertainty](unknown.md).

APPLICATION: General ideas are generally useful, but not in a practical sense until we start [testing them](results.md). However, specific ideas can create patterns across other domains, and are the foundation for how we make general ideas. For that reason, theory is *never* as effective as implementation, though it's longer-lasting (which is why [teachers](education.md) love theory and [experts](jobs-specialization.md) don't).

Most professional [storytellers](stories.md) and [comedians](humor.md) use associations with value to tremendous effect. By inserting an object at the right timing, they can evoke tremendous [associations](symbols.md) with a relatively small gesture.

This can get us into a ton of trouble if we're not careful, and is the source of many [large-scale misuses of power](mgmt-badsystems.md). Beyond [divine revelation](religion.md), the only way to clarify values is through [philosophically examining](philosophy.md) and [analyzing](logic.md) them. Otherwise, we let our [feelings](mind-feelings.md) define our values.

## Emphasizing values

We use a specific process to develop and solidify our [beliefs](trust.md):

1. Whether intentionally or passively, develop more [certainty](understanding-certainty.md) by discovering increasingly more values that reflect what we had believed.
2. As we become more certain, we develop stronger [feelings](mind-feelings.md) about it, sometimes even associating it with [virtue](morality.md).
3. The stronger our feelings about that value, the more we combine and conflate it with other things.
4. Even when we [analyze](logic.md) to compensate for the stronger feelings, we will naturally keep adding emotional associations as the value is more intensely understood.
5. As the values become more clear, they become a key part of our [identity](identity.md), thereby solidifying their presence in ourselves forever (since they'll become a [past part](legacy.md) of our identity if we change them later).

APPLICATION: If we live with only the values of things and not the things themselves, our existence is a defective pile of vaguely recognizable abstractions. The [Stoics](philosophy.md) say this is a [good way to live](goodlife.md), but [modern psychology](science.md) has literally *proven* that it's not.

We build our values into a loose hierarchy, with some values holding more [influence](power-influence.md) over our minds than others. At the top, we have [religious devotion](religion.md) and [addiction](addiction.md). At the bottom, we move into less-[certain](understanding-certainty.md) elements, extending out into further uncertainty into a formless [void](unknown.md).

Whenever we [change](people-changes.md), our hierarchy is simply rearranging, but often because of the introduction of a [new value](understanding.md) or destruction of a [well-established belief](trust.md). This can frequently mean we discover, bury, or rebuild components of our [personality](personality.md).

Our desire for [safety](safety.md) and the tremendous magnifying [power](power.md) of [exponents](math.md) mean some of the most powerful values we can hold are self-reinforced adverse ideas:

- Fear of how much we [fear](mind-feelings-fear.md)
- [Conceit](morality.md) about how little we're conceited
- Hatred about others' [hate](morality-evil.md)

APPLICATION: The more powerful a value feels upon us, the more we're [enslaved](addiction.md) to it instead of thinking [rationally](logic.md). This isn't always bad, however, and is often how we can accomplish otherwise-impossible [purposes](purpose.md).

Also, people can often [manipulate](image-distortion.md) the associations of values to other values to gain [power](power.md). Many aspects of [shame](mind-feelings-shame.md) and [taboo social structures](morality-taboo.md) come from this manipulation.

APPLICATION: We can control our values to the degree we [understand](understanding.md) them.

## Extraction

Since we assemble the values from [preconceived beliefs](mind-bias.md), we must constantly reconsider anything we're sticking together that isn't directly related to the specific information we're convinced is true.

This, however, isn't easy, because values are notoriously difficult to define, for several reasons.

Firstly, since their very existence is bound by [language](language.md), no individual value can exist alone in a vacuum. Each value has to have some connection to other values to make any sort of sense. For example, the value of "blue" can't be defined without at *least* "non-blue", and probably needs "color", "eye", and other values for it to be at all useful. "Color", then, would also need values defined for "light", "shading", and others. "Light" would need definitions for "lens" and "color". It never ends and eventually circles back on itself when "blue" becomes necessary to define something else.

Further, we tend to "flavor" our thoughts with experiences that associate with them. For example, if you were instructed to think of a random color for a bird, you're [statistically](math.md) more likely to think of a blue-colored bird because your experience dictates its association, and you'd be affected by the prior paragraph either way.

Second, since values *only* exist in our minds, they're difficult to [communicate](language.md). We must find words to specially define nuances among various things, which is why people use [trade-speak](jobs-specialization.md). But we *also* have to communicate information while we're constantly [changing inwardly](people-changes.md), [learning](understanding.md), and [making decisions](people-decisions.md). This doesn't even include the [changes happening around us](trends.md) over time.

APPLICATION: We must slow down if someone else uses the same [words](awareness.md) as us but is concluding something [irrational](logic.md). They're probably using a different definition of that word than you.

Third, we make *many* associations beyond what we're consciously [aware](awareness.md) of. Our minds are incredibly elaborate, and one object will have connections with dozens, hundreds, and sometimes thousands of other things. Those things all represent themselves in our conscious depending on a vast variety of conditions, including how we [feel](mind-feelings.md) and the other associations around our recalled experience.

APPLICATION: We become more clear-headed when we more clearly focus our values. Everyone can benefit from 10 to 40 minutes a day of thinking about what they've [learned](education.md) and [understood](understanding.md).

In short, abstracting a value would require it being unrelated to other values, without it moving around, with full awareness of what we feel and think about that value.

APPLICATION: Values are difficult things to take apart, mostly because of how much they connect to other values. As an average non-philosopher, it's more advantageous for us to be [aware](awareness.md) of many of our associations than it is to understand one specific thing as an extracted entity.

APPLICATION: Philosophers debate endlessly about *where* values come from, but we can still definitely assign patterns to consistent things in reality. I may or may not see the color "blue", and don't know where it is, but the sky and ocean are still "blue" things in whatever form we call it.