What makes a thing valuable?

Two things determine value; necessity and desire... some things necessary are so common and plentiful that they are without price, but they are only priceless.. supply determines price for the most part, but it is only a variable within a range of value... value is meaning, and all meaning and value is based upon the ultimate meaning and value that is life...and with life comes desire, which can be considered as another variable...

Technically, assigning "thing-ness" is itself the first level of measurement (the "ordinal level"), so by definition all "things" are of some cognitive value. Heiddeger suggested that "thing-ness" is context specific, i.e. things are evoked in the flow of being....they have no permanent status...and that even includes the thing we call "self" which we might assume does the "valuing". Another consideration in your question is Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" in which physical needs precede social needs in terms of priority of value.(Fido's point above) Thus the thirsty man in the desert might pay $1000 for a bottle of water.

Meaning

Do you think that an "object" can have intrinsic (or absolute) value apart from the desires, values and interests of those ascribing value to it?

True value comes from true needs and the potential a thing has or not to fulfil it...which of course is a matter of fact not of thinking or believing...water comes to mind when I am thirsty...

Yes: objective "potential" is critical. And water/thirst is a good example.

That is a very good question and I am trying to find a scientific answer to it myself. I know someone who studies it like a science and I asked him to explain it to me so that I could study it and retain it in my memory. "my memory is so bad that I have to study it over and over to retain it". The person I am referring to "who knows this better than anyone I know, does not seem to understand that I learn this best in a format that I can revisit multiple times. I will ask him to come and share his wisdom with us one more time and maybe he will and maybe this time I will retain it.

NOT "society"; value is the maximum that someone is willing to exchange for the object of value.





David

This is a difficult question to answer because it is convolved with thousand
parameters coming from society and human interests but I am wondering that
how fast (order of seconds) our minds can decide and evaluate and manage all
these parameters (sometimes hidden ones)!

Well, I can't see how it could. Each item is desirable depending entirely on the person desiring it. Value is only possible through our perception of items. Which leads to believe that to find an items value we must look at people- but each person values items entirely different from another. Where does this value come from?

I agree there entirely. It is like how Mills and Skinner feel on determinism- there are so many different factors leading to this one sensation that it's difficult to pin point an exact answer. But, as Skinner said, there are generally a few categories that creates the most impact into the result. I feel that it is the same with value.

Yes, it is true that value depends upon meaning, but is not synonymous with it.
We can say that the more meaningful something is, the more valuable it is.

DAVID offered us an Extrinsic definition of value that applies to commodities, but not to human relationships, such as unconditional love. I shall offer a definition that sounds technical, until you get used to it, and comprehend it. I won't go into the advanced philosophical analysis behind it, unless upon request, to speak in terms of primary vs. secondary properties,; nor of "value quantifiers" in analogy with logical quantifiers. I'll try to be clearer than that. Here goes:

To judge J, at time t, something is valuable if its properties are perceived as matching the property-names that comprise the meaning of the thing-being-evaluated. We learn meanings associated with specific words or concepts when we first learn the language, our native tongue. For purposes of logical analysis, the meaning is here seen as a set. ...a set of predicates (property names.) If this set matches {even partially} the properties in the item (or person) being judged, prized, valued, assessed, then the judge (the one doing the evaluating) will tend to describe the item as "valuable" or as "having some value."

To put it in plain simple everyday language, when the actual matches the ideal, there is value.
[ The actual never has to touch the ideal, just correspond to it, in the mind of the valuer. Value is a matter of degree: to the extent x
matches the picture you have for x’s in your mind, you will tend to call it: a good x. ]

If it has everything (it is supposed to have in the picture of the ideal concept of things of that kind) then the valuer is likely to call the item "good" or "a good one." So, goodness is: being all there - under its concept. Exemplifying fully its concept makes something "good."

I trust this has been helpful and is responsive to YamMit's concern and that of everyone else who had an inquiry about this topic.

To learn more about my approach to Ethics, see these papers which you can either search for on Google, or simply click on the links here and enjoy reading the selections free of charge. These are all PDF files, safe to open:

LIVING THE GOOD LIFE by Marvin C. Katz & Wade Harvey
http://tinyurl.com/28mtn56

A UNIFIED THEORY OF ETHICS - Marvin C. Katz, Ph.D.
http://tinyurl.com/27pzhbf

Ethical Adventures - http://tinyurl.com/38zfrh7

Ethical Explorations - http://tinyurl.com/22ohd2x
Aspects of Ethics: Views through a new lens.
http://tinyurl.com/36u6gpo

Thank you Dr Katz you have given me something to analyze or study and I will respond after I have thought about it for a little while.

I have thought about what you had written and have come to a conclusion that by the word ideal that you use, "you may be saying that value is in the eye of the beholder. I was hoping that there may have been some way to prove that something should be considered valuable regardless who is judging it. Are there any universal values that everyone can agree on?

How does a thirsty man in the desert get hold of $1000?

In this way I think the answer is common sense.

Perhaps the question of what makes something valuable can be approached from two angles, from that of values and that of interests. They aren't always the same.

Welcome Joanne. It's valuable to have your thoughtful participation.

Regarding VALUE what needs to be understood is that it is relational and it does not even have anything to do with minds...functionality is enough.
Say for instance I instruct a given geometric pattern say a cube to find a perfect spot where it can fit out of a potential number of candidates...in a set a cube hole will be the most valued optimal candidate given the X function input I introduced in the system for the cube to perform...needs work exactly in the same way no matter if are talking of human beings or cubes...having a need is simply to have a task that must be performed to bring balance to the system...obviously for a given need, as an input, a pattern, there is an optimal matching output, a mirror pattern...