Editing Value theory (section)

=== Evaluative terms ===
Values are expressed through evaluative terms. For example, the words ''good'', ''best'', ''great'', and ''excellent'' convey positive values, whereas words like ''bad'' and ''terrible'' indicate negative values.<ref name="auto8"/> Value theorists distinguish between thin and [[Thick concept|thick evaluative terms]]. Thin evaluative terms, like ''good'' and ''bad'', express pure evaluations without any additional descriptive content.{{efn|Some philosophers, such as [[G. E. M. Anscombe]], [[Philippa Foot]], and [[Iris Murdoch]], have argued that there are no pure thin evaluative terms.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Wiland|Driver|2022|loc=§ 2. Moral and Political Philosophy}} | {{harvnb|Chappell|2013|pp=188–189}} }}</ref>}} They contrast with thick evaluative terms, like ''[[Courage|courageous]]'' and ''[[cruel]]'', which provide more information by expressing other qualities, such as [[character trait]]s, in addition to the evaluation.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Orsi|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cc3cBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA2 2–3]}} | {{harvnb|Hirose|Olson|2015|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=uvzVBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA3 3]}} }}</ref> Values are often understood as degrees that cover positive and negative magnitudes corresponding to good and bad. The term ''value'' is sometimes restricted to positive degrees to contrast with the term ''disvalue'' for negative degrees. The words ''better'' and ''worse'' are used to compare degrees, but it is controversial whether a quantitative comparison is always possible.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Schroeder|2021|loc=§ 1.2 Good, Better, Bad, § 2.3 Incommensurability/Incomparability}} | {{harvnb|Orsi|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cc3cBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA122 122–123]}} | {{harvnb|Tappolet|2015|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=uvzVBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA82 82]}} | {{harvnb|Frankena|2006|pp=636–637}} }}</ref> [[Evaluation]] is the assessment or measurement of value, often employed to compare the benefits of different options to find the most advantageous choice.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Rescher|1969|pp=61–62}} | {{harvnb|Frankena|2006|pp=636–637}} }}</ref>

Evaluative terms are sometimes distinguished from [[Normativity|normative]] or deontic terms. Normative terms, like ''right'', ''wrong'', and ''obligation'', prescribe actions or other states by expressing what ought to be done or what is required.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Orsi|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cc3cBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA8 8–9]}} | {{harvnb|Schroeder|2021|loc=§ 3. Relation to the Deontic}} }}</ref> Evaluative terms have a wider scope because they are not limited to what people can control or are responsible for. For instance, involuntary events like digestion and earthquakes can have a positive or negative value even if they are not right or wrong in a strict sense.<ref>{{harvnb|Hurka|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=K44RDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA357 357–358]}}</ref> Despite the distinction, evaluative and normative concepts are closely related. For example, the value of the consequences of an action may influence its normative status{{em dash}}whether the action is right or wrong.<ref name="auto4">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Orsi|2015|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cc3cBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA8 8–9]}} | {{harvnb|Schroeder|2021|loc=§ 3. Relation to the Deontic}} | {{harvnb|Hurka|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=K44RDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA357 357–358]}} }}</ref>