Theoretical framework demonstrates that valuation emerges from goal-directed systems, indicating that value conflicts represent collisions between competing systemic ends.
Abstract "This paper proposes a finalist theory of value that reframes the classical dispute between axiological objectivism and subjectivism. Rather than evaluating whether value resides inherently within the object or the subject, it interrogates the structural conditions a system must satisfy for the operation of valuation to emerge. The answer is systemic: valuation is an emergent relation that necessarily occurs wherever a system is oriented toward specific self-states, rather than an intrinsic property of entities or an arbitrary projection of consciousness. From this mechanism, we derive an operational definition: the value of an entity, action, or state is proportional to its proximity to the organizing purpose of its containing framework. This definition is paired with a gradation of epistemic levels for evaluation and a distinction between circumstantial priority and structural hierarchy. This architecture allows value conflicts to be reformulated as collisions between systemic ends rather than irreducible clashes between isolated values. Finally, the paper rigorously examines its own boundaries, distinguishing between the hierarchical ordering of values within a given purpose—which the theory resolves—and the ultimate ordering of one purpose relative to another. The latter exceeds the scope of the present theory and is addressed in a subsequent work, A Theory of the Hierarchy of Purposes, which develops the structural relations among purposes and their normative organization across frameworks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
David Descole (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: