We hear a lot about ‘values’ these days – societal,
Christian, corporate, family, personal. It feels like everyone and everything
has values that are worn with a badge of honour, as if that automatically makes
us beyond reproach and worthy of sainthood.
A quick google reveals numerous instructive articles, mostly about corporate values, and they all say much the same thing – values should be well-defined, unique, adhered to, blah blah, but their knotty problems and pitfalls are rarely discussed.
What prompted me to examine values was a recent spat with my neighbour, whom I shall call Ann. We were disagreeing – suitably socially-distanced – over aspects of the pandemic. Was Britain’s death rate really worse than that of other countries? Was it wrong not to Clap for Carers? Was driving hither and thither to find a sponge to wash the car an essential journey?
She terminated the discussion by claiming, “We obviously have different values and must agree to differ.”
What she meant was: I’m obviously more compassionate than you – my values are superior and there’s no point carrying on the conversation.
Really?
Values can be defined as good things that give meaning to life; they are the bedrock of opinions, decisions and actions.
Because Ann and I agree that the Covid-19 suffering and
death is “horrific” and we feel “desperately sorry” for the victims’ and their loved
ones, then it seems we do share the value of compassion in equal measure. However,
while I think it’s too soon to judge whether Britain’s handling of the crisis
has been comparatively poor, because sufficient data is not yet available for a
proper analysis, Ann wants Boris’s head on a platter and she wants it now.
It’s not compassion that divides us, but something else. What might it be? Here are some thoughts:
1. Values are ‘good’ by definition, but the meaning of ‘good’ is fluid over time and space, and recently has been turned on its head. Heroes such as Winston Churchill have been rebranded as villains, and good has suddenly become evil. Are every one of our values, to which we’ve aspired over the years, still kosher?
2. Regardless of whether all our values remain good, they can contradict each other. For example:
a.
It’s good to be honest and it’s good to be loyal,
but sometimes you can’t be both at the same time.
b.
It’s good to have ‘a diverse senior management team’
and it’s good to ‘reward merit’, but if positive discrimination is pursued to
achieve a diverse team, then some merit might go unrewarded.
3. The way that values are interpreted and executed can also leave a lot to be desired. A corporate value of ‘operating sustainably’, which underpins the destruction of ancient woodland by ‘mitigating’ with new saplings, is not good. HS2. Take. Note.
4. There’s more to decision-making than values, which can be stymied by things outside one’s control. Three examples:
a.
Sustainability sometimes flies out the window
because of Government policy – aviation noise is a case in point. (The pun was
unintentional. Honest.)
b.
A personal value of generosity might not be
possible if cash is tight.
c.
A difference of opinion might stem from a
different information base or education rather than from different values.
I surmise that the root cause of my disagreeing with Ann is 4c as above. Not only did we source our information differently, but my higher education was all science and maths, whereas Ann’s was very much the arts. I’m therefore satisfied that my value of compassion is secure in thought, word and deed.
But perhaps I need to work on magnanimity…
No comments:
Post a Comment