Instrumental and intrinsic value: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:28, 19 June 2024

Revision as of 06:30, 24 July 2024

Line 2:

{{redirect|Means to an end|the album|Means to an End}}

{{Overquotation|date=June 2019}}

In [[moral philosophy]], '''instrumental and intrinsic value''' are the distinction between what is a ''means to an end'' and what is as an ''end in itself''.<ref name=":0">{{cite book|last1=Hirose|first1=Iwao|title=The Oxford Handbook of Value Theory|last2=Olson|first2=Jonas|date=2015|publisher=Oxford University Press}}</ref> Things are deemed to have '''instrumental value''' (or '''extrinsic value'''<ref>{{Cite web |title=instrumental value |url=https://www.ipbes.net/glossary-tag/instrumental-value |access-date=2024-03-06 |website=IPBES Homepage}}</ref>) if they help one achieve a particular end; '''intrinsic values''', by contrast, are understood to be desirable in and of themselves. A tool or appliance, such as a hammer or washing machine, has instrumental value because it helps one pound in a nail or clean clothes, respectively. Happiness and pleasure are typically considered to have intrinsic value insofar as asking ''why'' someone would want them makes little sense: they are desirable for their own sake irrespective of their possible instrumental value. The classic names ''instrumental'' and ''intrinsic'' were coined by sociologist [[Max Weber]], who spent years studying good meanings people assigned to their actions and beliefs.

The ''Oxford Handbook of Value Theory'' provides three modern definitions of intrinsic and instrumental value: