Own scale of human values. Value scale. Let's prioritize. Interpretation of data on the scales of vital spheres

To understand yourself, to realize what things are most important to you, to determine what should be wasted of your time and what to focus on in difficult situations, you need to determine your own scale of values. To do this, you can perform the following practice.

Step 1.

Below is a sample list of core values.
You need to read it, if you think that something is missing and you have other values ​​- add to the list.

• Life wisdom (knowledge of life and understanding of its laws)
• Interesting job
• Active, active life.
• Freedom as independence in deeds and actions
• Beauty (experience of beauty)
• Health (physical and mental)
• Financially secure life (lack of material problems)
• Love (spiritual and physical intimacy with a loved one)
• Friendship (having good and true friends)
• General good situation in the country and the world (as a condition for well-being for everyone)
• Public recognition (respect for others, team, workmates)
• Cognition (the possibility of expanding one's education, horizons, general culture, intellectual development)
• Equality (equal opportunities for all)
• Independence, as independence in judgments and assessments
• Pleasures (a life full of pleasure, entertainment, good time)
• Family (happy family life)
• Creativity (the possibility of self-expression in creativity)
• Self-confidence (awareness of one's own worth, lack of self-condemnation and other negative emotions towards oneself)

After reading the list, you need to rank the values, put them in their places. First place in importance for you personally, second, third, etc. How to do it: you can write each value on a piece of paper and arrange it in descending order of importance from top to bottom, you can copy each value into a separate Excel cell (I do this) and move cells up/down in importance. If there are difficulties in comparing two values ​​“which is more important?”, You need to ask the question: “if I were offered to choose only one of the two, what would I give up in life?”. The rest will be more important.

Step 2

Next, we will work with the five most important values ​​​​from the ranked list, because this is the basis, the foundation of a happy life. If life is built in the direction of the most complete realization of these values, then you will be successful, and you will feel very happy, feel that you live a full life, the way you want. It is very important to choose the most important values ​​and focus on them, this will allow you to devote maximum attention, time and effort to their implementation.

Now you need to more clearly define these values ​​that you have chosen, you need to describe what exactly it means to you, for example, “freedom”. Complete the definition of values ​​by continuing the phrase, "freedom is when ...". Eliminate the “not” particle from the description, because you write about what you want, not what you don’t want.

Step 3

Now write down for the five selected concepts what you are doing to have more of this in your life. For example, "freedom is when ... ... To have more freedom in my life, I do ... ...".

This exercise should be done slowly, thinking and feeling. If you succeed, then you will feel that everything falls into place. Now you understand how to live (the main directions) and what to devote most of your time to. It is clear why you are drawn to certain activities, people (corresponding to your values) and do not want to devote time to others, seemingly necessary, but not corresponding to your values.

To receive new techniques and practices, it is enough to distribute project materials. I would be glad if you can regularly receive materials for self-development. See you soon!

The Schwartz value test (Schwartz Value Questionnaire. / Schwartz Method) is used to study the dynamics of changes in values ​​both in groups (cultures) in connection with changes in society, and for an individual in connection with her life problems.

By values ​​Shalom Schwartz (Schwartz Shalom H.) meant "cognized" needs that directly depend on the culture, environment, mentality of a particular society (see Fig. Model of the ratio of ten basic human values ​​(Schwartz's circle of values)).

The Schwartz questionnaire is based on the theory that all values ​​are divided into social and individual. The questionnaire was developed by Shalom Schwartz in 1992.

Method of Sh. Schwartz (Value Questionnaire (CO) Schwartz. / Schwartz Value Test):

Description of the Schwartz technique. The Schwartz questionnaire consists from two parts.

The first part of the questionnaire is designed to study the values, ideals and beliefs that affect the personality. List of values consists of two parts: nouns and adjectives, including 57 values. The subject evaluates each of the proposed values ​​on a scale from 7 to -1 points.

The second part of the Schwartz questionnaire is a personality profile. Consists of 40 descriptions of a person, characterizing 10 types of values. To evaluate descriptions, a scale from 4 to -1 points is used.

First part of the questionnaire

Instruction:

Ask yourself, "What values ​​are important to me as guiding principles in my life? What values ​​are less important to me?" Your task: to assess how important each value is to you as a guiding principle in your life.

Scale for evaluation:

• 7 - a value that is extremely important as a guiding principle in your life (usually there are one or two such values);
• 6 - very important;
• 5 - quite important;
• 4 - important;
• 3 - not very important;
• 2 - little important;
• 1 - not important;
• 0 - completely indifferent;
• -1 is the opposite of the principles you follow.

Before you begin, read the list of 30 values ​​and choose the one that is most important to you and rate its importance as a "7". Next, choose the value that is least important to you and rate it -1, 0, or 1, according to its importance. Then evaluate the remaining values ​​(from -1 to 7).

Test Material - List of Values ​​I:

1 EQUALITY (equal opportunities for all)

2 INTERNAL HARMONY (being at peace with yourself)

3 SOCIAL STRENGTH (control over others, dominance)

4 PLEASURE (gratification of desires)

5 FREEDOM (freedom of thought and action)

6 SPIRITUAL LIFE (emphasis on spiritual rather than material matters)

7 FEELING OF BELONGING (feeling that others care about me)

8 SOCIAL ORDER (society stability)

9 LIFE FULL OF EXPERIENCES (striving for novelty)

10 MEANING OF LIFE (goals in life)

11 COURTESY (courtesy, good manners)

12 WEALTH (material property, money)

13 NATIONAL SECURITY (protection of one's nation from enemies)

14 SELF-RESPECT (belief in one's own worth)

15 RESPECT FOR THE OPINIONS OF OTHERS (taking into account the interests of other people, avoiding confrontation)

16 CREATIVITY (uniqueness, rich imagination)

17 WORLD PEACE (freedom from war and conflict)

18 RESPECT FOR TRADITIONS (preservation of recognized traditions, customs)

19 MATURE LOVE (deep emotional and spiritual intimacy)

20 SELF-DISCIPLINE (self-restraint, resistance to temptations)

21 RIGHT TO PRIVACY (right to available space)

22 FAMILY SAFETY (safety for loved ones)

23 SOCIAL RECOGNITION (approval, respect for others)

24 UNITY WITH NATURE (merging with nature)

25 CHANGING LIFE (a life filled with challenges, novelty and change)

26 WISDOM (mature understanding of the world)

28 TRUE FRIENDSHIP (close friends)

29 WORLD OF BEAUTY (beauty of nature and art)

30 SOCIAL JUSTICE (correcting injustice, caring for the weak)

Now rate how important each of the following values ​​is to you, as the guiding principle of your life. These values ​​are expressed in ways of acting that may be more or less important to you. Try to distinguish the values ​​as much as possible using all the numbers. To get started, read the values ​​in list 2, choose what is most important to you, rate it on the scale (mark 7). Then choose a value that is contrary to your principles (mark - 1). If there is no such value, choose the least important value for you and rate it with 0 or 1, according to its importance. Then evaluate the rest of the values.

List of values ​​II:

31 INDEPENDENT (self-reliant, self-sufficient)

32 RESPONDENT (avoiding extremes in feelings and actions)

33 FAITHFUL (loyal to friends, group)

34 PURPOSE (hardworking, inspired)

35 OPEN TO OTHERS (tolerant of different ideas and beliefs)

36 MODEST (simple, not trying to attract attention)

37 BOLD (adventurer, risk taker)

38 PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT (preserving nature)

39 INFLUENTIAL (having influence on people and events)

40 RESPECTING PARENTS AND ELDERS (showing respect)

41 CHOOSE YOUR OWN GOALS (selecting your own intentions)

42 HEALTHY (not sick physically or mentally)

43 CAPABLE (competent, able to act effectively)

44 ACCEPTING LIFE (obeying life's circumstances)

45 HONEST (frank, sincere)

46 PRESERVING YOUR IMAGE (protecting your own "face")

47 OBEDIENT (executive, obeying the rules)

48 SMART (logical, thinking)

49 USEFUL (working for the benefit of others)

50 ENJOYING LIFE (enjoying food, intimacy, entertainment, etc.)

51 GOOD (holding religious faith and beliefs)

52 RESPONSIBLE (reliable, trustworthy)

53 INQUIRY (interested in everything, inquisitive)

54 FORGIVING (seeking to forgive another)

55 SUCCESSFUL (achieving the goal)

56 CLEAN (neat, tidy)

57 Self-indulgent (doing what pleases)

The second part of the questionnaire

Instruction:

Below are descriptions of some people. Please read each description and consider how each person is like or different from you. Put a cross in one of the cells on the right, which shows how similar the described person is to you.

Personality Profile

Key, processing of results, interpretation of the Schwartz technique.

The methodology gives a quantitative expression of the significance of each of the ten motivational types of values ​​at two levels:

• at the level of normative ideals and
• at the level of individual priorities.

Processing of the results is carried out by correlating the answers of the subject with the key. Corresponding Key is given below (in table 2). It contains the item numbers of both parts of the questionnaire corresponding to each type of value. The average score for this type of value shows the degree of its significance.

When processing the first section of the questionnaire - "Reviewvalues"(level of normative ideals) - the results of lists 1 and 2 are summarized.

Before calculating the results of the second section of the questionnaire - "Personality Profile"- it is necessary to convert the scale of the questionnaire into points. The key for converting subjects' responses to scores is given below. in table 1.

Table 1. The number of points assigned to the points of the Personality Profile scale when processing the results.

During the initial processing of data for each part of the questionnaire (“Review of values” and “Profile of personality”), the average score is calculated for the answers selected by the subject in accordance with the key (see table 2). Processing is carried out separately for each of the 10 types of value orientations. The value of this average score in relation to others makes it possible to judge the degree of significance of this type of values ​​for the subject.

It should be noted that the data obtained from the first and second parts of the questionnaire usually do not coincide, since the value orientations of the individual at the level of normative ideals cannot always be realized in behavior due to limited human capabilities, group pressure, adherence to certain traditions, following patterns of behavior and other reasons.

In accordance with the average score for each type of values, their rank ratio is established. Each value type is assigned a rank from 1 to 10. The first rank is assigned to the value type with the highest average score, the tenth - with the lowest average score. The rank from 1 to 3, obtained by the corresponding types of values, characterizes their high significance for the subject. The rank from 7 to 10 indicates the low importance of the corresponding values.

Table 2. Key for processing results

Interpretation, description of values.

Here is a brief definition of motivational types according to their central goal (Schwartz, 1992, 1994; Smith, Schwartz, 1997):

Power (Power) - social status, dominance over people and resources;

Achievement - personal success in accordance with social standards;

Hedonism - pleasure or sensual pleasure;

Stimulation - excitement and novelty;

Independence (Self-Direction) - independence of thought and action;

Universalism - understanding, tolerance and protection of the well-being of all people and nature;

Kindness (Benevolence) - maintaining and improving the well-being of loved ones;

Tradition - respect for and responsibility for cultural and religious customs and ideas;

Conformity (Conformity) - containment of actions and motives that can harm others and do not meet social expectations;

Security (Security) - the security and stability of society, relationships and oneself.

Schwartz describes the following characteristics of these types of values.

1. Power (Power). The functioning of social institutions requires a certain differentiation of statuses, and in most cases in interpersonal relations in different cultures, a combination of indicators of dominance - subordination was revealed. The central goal of this type of values ​​is to achieve social status or prestige, control or dominance over people and means (authority, wealth, social power, maintaining one's public image, public recognition). Power and achievement values ​​(see below) focus on social respect, however achievement values ​​(e.g., successful, ambitious) emphasize the active exercise of competence in direct interaction, while power values ​​(authority, wealth) emphasize achieving or maintaining a dominant position in within the whole social system.

2. Achievement. The defining goal of this type of values ​​is personal success through the manifestation of competence in accordance with social standards. The manifestation of social competence (which is the content of this value) in the context of dominant cultural standards entails social approval.

3. Hedonism. The motivational goal of this type is defined as enjoyment or sensual pleasure (pleasure, enjoyment of life).

4. Stimulation. This type of value is derived from the organism's need for variety and deep experiences in order to maintain an optimal level of activity. Biologically determined variations in the need for stimulation, mediated by social experience, lead to individual differences in the significance of this value. The motivational goal of this type of value is to strive for novelty and deep experiences.

5. Self-Direction. The defining goal of this type of values ​​is the independence of thinking and choice of methods of action, in creativity and research activity. Independence as a value is derived from the organism's need for self-control and self-government, as well as from interactional needs for autonomy and independence.

6. Universalism (Universalism). The motivational goal of this type of values ​​is understanding, tolerance, protection of the well-being of all people and nature. The motivational goals of universalism are derived from those needs for the survival of groups and individuals, which become clearly necessary when people come into contact with someone outside their environment or when the primary group expands.

7. Kindness (Benevolence). This is a narrower "pro-social" type of values ​​compared to universalism. Its underlying benevolence focuses on well-being in daily interactions with loved ones. This type of value is considered to be derived from the need for positive interaction, the need for affiliation, and the need for the group to thrive. Its motivational goal is to preserve the well-being of people with whom the individual is in personal contact (usefulness, loyalty, indulgence, honesty, responsibility, friendship, mature love).

8. Traditions Any social groups develop their own symbols and rituals. Their role and functioning are determined by the experience of the group and are fixed in traditions and customs. The traditional way of behavior becomes a symbol of group solidarity, an expression of common values ​​and a guarantee of survival. Traditions most often take the form of religious rites, beliefs and norms of behavior. The motivational goal of this value is respect, acceptance of the customs and ideas that exist in culture (respect for traditions, humility, piety, accepting one's fate, moderation) and following them.
9. Conformity. The defining motivational goal of this type is the deterrence and prevention of actions, as well as inclinations and urges to actions that may harm others or do not meet social expectations. This value is derived from the requirement to restrain tendencies that have negative social consequences (obedience, self-discipline, politeness, respect for parents and elders).
10. Security (Security). The motivational goal of this type is security for other people and oneself, harmony, stability of society and relationships. It is derived from basic individual and group needs.

Theory of K. Alderfer.

In the 70s of the twentieth century. Alderfer modified Maslow's theory. He identified 3 groups of needs:

The needs of existence;

The needs of connections aimed at supporting contacts, recognition, self-affirmation, support, group security;

The needs of personal growth, which are manifested in a person's desire for recognition and self-affirmation.

Like Maslow, Alderfer considers needs within a hierarchy, but considers it possible to move them from one level to another in different directions according to the “frustration-regression” principle. The process of moving up through the levels of needs is called the process of satisfying needs, and moving down is called the process of frustration, i.e. failure to satisfy a need. Thus, if it is impossible to satisfy the needs of a higher level, the worker again returns to the lower one and intensifies his activity here.

The presence of two directions of movement in meeting the needs creates additional opportunities for motivating employees in the organization. This theory opens the prospect for managers to find effective forms of motivation that can satisfy lower levels of needs if the organization does not provide an opportunity to satisfy the needs of higher levels.

human value scale.

Values ​​are located on a continuum closer to the right edge of maximum importance. Values ​​are what a person needs and what he does not have.

The scale of human values ​​is the core of his personality. First of all, these are ethical and religious values. They occupy the upper part of the scale of social values. Animals have no values, and they are practically absent in a baby. Therefore, they are not biologically inherited. They are acquired in society - the entrance of socialization. A person grows, his system of values ​​is formed. A developed system of values ​​is the result of proper socialization, and not its precondition.

Values ​​reflect not just a deficit, a person's need for something, but also the process of social comparison. People not only feel their needs, but are also aware of them, and, realizing, compare themselves with others. Evaluation of oneself in comparison with others - primarily those standing on the same social step - expresses the desire for self-realization and self-affirmation.

Values ​​are not only a mechanism, but also the result of social comparison, a way of ordering the elements of culture.

So, the core of the human personality is formed by: the scale of values, the motivation to achieve self-realization, freedom of choice and will.

Scale of values

Any classification of values ​​according to type and level is invariably conditional due to the fact that social and cultural values ​​are introduced into it. In addition, it is difficult to insert one or another value that has its own ambiguity (for example, family) in a certain column. Nevertheless, the following conditionally ordered classification of values ​​can be given.

Vital: life, health, physicality, security, well-being, human condition (satiety, peace, vigor), strength, endurance, quality of life, natural environment (environmental values), practicality, consumption, etc.

Social: social status, diligence, wealth, work, family, unity, patriotism, tolerance, discipline, enterprise, risk-taking, social equality, gender equality, ability to achieve, personal independence, professionalism, active participation in society, focus on past or future, extralocal or compatriotic orientation, level of consumption.

Political: freedom of speech, civil liberties, good ruler, law, order, constitution, civil peace.

Moral: good, good, love, friendship, duty, honor, honesty, disinterestedness, decency, fidelity, mutual assistance, justice, respect for elders and love for children.

Religious: God, divine law, faith, salvation, grace, ritual, Scripture and Tradition.

Aesthetic: beauty (or, conversely, the aesthetics of the ugly), style, harmony, adherence to tradition or novelty, cultural identity or imitation.

Family, relatives, older generation. In all cultures, there is a greater or lesser degree of respect for these social elements, which is expressed both in the behavior of people (respect of the younger for the elders) and in the forms of address.

In Asian and African cultures, age is usually revered as a sign of wisdom and experience, and sometimes becomes one of the cores of culture. The identification of an individual is carried out in his identification with his ancestors, although there is wide variability in resolving this issue for different cultures. If a number of nomadic peoples consider it a matter of honor to remember about 9-12 previous generations in different branches, then in a modern industrial society a person rarely keeps the memory of more than two generations of ancestors in a straight line.

Interpersonal relationships. The attitude towards equality or hierarchy in relations with other people is one of the criteria for the difference between cultures. What a European perceives as humility, obedience, a person's renunciation of his freedom, for other cultures means recognition of the right of a respected and influential person to lead. Orientation towards individualism or solidarity in many ways distinguishes the West and Eastern cultures, which will be discussed in more detail in subsequent chapters.

Wealth. Material wealth as a value is inherent, it would seem, in all cultures. However, in reality, the attitude towards it is very different, and the very object of wealth depends on the nature of the economy. For nomadic peoples, the most important wealth is cattle, for a settled peasant, land; in a feudal society, the status of an individual was directly related to the wealth demonstrated in the way of life.

The attitude to wealth depends largely on the dominant factor of sociality. In pre-industrial society, conspicuous wealth played an important role, as it was the most obvious evidence of the power and influence of its owners, their belonging to the upper class. The accumulation of wealth, so necessary in any society, lowered the status of the owner, unless it was intended for later distribution or use for the common good. The estates possessing monetary wealth - merchants and usurers - enjoyed for the most part low prestige, and especially usurers as people who benefit from the difficulties of other people.

The situation changes radically in industrial society. As capitalism grows, it is the accumulated and hidden capital put into circulation that acquires the greatest value in the public mind. The influence and power of the owner depend on the movement of capital through invisible financial channels, even if the owner himself led a relatively modest lifestyle. At a later stage, during the period of mass production, a new turn occurs, expanded consumption grows, turning into conspicuous consumption, in which goods and services are purchased not because of their own properties, but because they are expensive, i.e. available only to wealthy people. Turning to conspicuous consumption not only brings satisfaction, but also raises the status of the rich in the opinion and attitude of others. This tendency is penetrating into other strata, who may feel the satisfaction of sharing in prestigious extravagance.

Labor as a value. Labor has by no means only economic significance or serves as a factor determining social relations. Labor is also an important cultural value. This is always present both in folk wisdom and in more complex systems of morality or ideology. So, in many languages ​​there are similar proverbs: “Patience and work will grind everything” (and vice versa: “Water does not flow under a lying stone”). In fiction, Voltaire elegantly expressed his attitude to work: "Labor eliminates three great misfortunes from us: boredom, vice and need." True, in the spirit of his aristocratic circle, he put boredom in the first place.

Of course, the attitude to work, as well as to other values, is determined not only by spiritual or moral criteria, but turns out to be contradictory, depending largely on other factors, among which the following should be highlighted: a) production, i.e. the class status of a person and his attitude to property, since assessments of his position for an entrepreneur and a hired worker can differ sharply; b) professional, covering the prestige of a particular profession; c) technological, i.e. a person's attitude to one or another side of production (machine, conveyor, computer), which can vary from high interest to indifference and even hostility.

According to the listed parameters, obviously, the attitude towards work can be negative as a source of oppression, dependence, as a factor that hinders personal development and suppresses vitality. Even in ancient Greece, a myth arose about Sisyphus, doomed to perform hard and meaningless work. In a Christian or Muslim paradise, a person was forever freed from labor and could only indulge in sensual or spiritual joys. In folk tales, often the lazy fool, devoid of greed, but possessing a good heart, succeeds more than the constantly preoccupied and tight-fisted hoarder.

In any class-differentiated system, the subjective disinterest of workers in their work is replaced by coercion, which can be in the nature of direct coercion (work "under pressure", under threat of punishment) or purely economic necessity, i.e. physical survival, in supporting his family.

Of course, there is socially useless and harmful labor activity and what is in the interests of an individual, group or collective, but may diverge from the interests of society as a whole. Therefore, the regulation of labor activity requires the combination of labor orientations with moral motives.

An appeal to a moral and value orientation is an important prerequisite for successful economic development. Every world religion encourages work, although it subordinates it to the higher values ​​of salvation. But it was precisely in this that the value duality of labor found its solution, its bulk was directed to socially significant spheres. It was precisely in the consecration of socially useful labor and the stimulation of constant useful activity that the main achievement of the religious reformation consisted. But even in the conditions of secularization, the ethical orientation of labor is preserved.

Labor takes on a different content depending on whether it is associated with wage labor or entrepreneurship.

The difference here depends largely on the position of man in the system of production. Living labor, and even in its developed professional form, usually has a lower status than entrepreneurship, business in its various variants. But ethical principles apply on both sides of this cumulative process. The worker requires conscientiousness, discipline, skill, professional orientation.

Human life is an absolute value, but the value of this value, what we call the content of the meaning of life, does not consist in the number of years lived, but in what fills this life and what is determined by the value orientations of the “I” of the individual. These attitudes (landmarks) allow comparison, as a result of which a certain scale of these attitudes is developed in the community of people, according to which the meanings of life of all members of this community are “distributed”. At the same time, the wider the community, the closer it is to humanity as a whole, the more adequately this scale of values ​​reflects the constructive and destructive tendencies in society, which are not always recognized by people as such in a particular community of people, say, in an ethnic group, in a community of co-religionists, etc. e. The processes of globalization obviously work for the primacy of the universal scale of values, although in real life individuals are almost always "squeezed" into the narrow framework of certain specific communities with a scale of meaningful life values ​​corresponding to each of them. Those who tried or are trying to go beyond this framework are sentenced by contemporaries to a poisoned cup of wine, like Socrates, crucifixion, like Jesus, they are declared crazy, like Chaadaev, branded with the nicknames of renegades and dissidents, enemies of the people, destroyed in prisons and camps, expelled from the country, as in the Soviet empire, etc.

It seems to me that the imaginary, but, nevertheless, the existing universal scale of values ​​that have meaning in life reflects the very history of the formation and evolution of human civilization, since new, higher marks, “risks” appear on this scale from time to time. This scale begins with marks that correspond to the values ​​of "verbal animals", according to the figurative and precise expression of the Pskov chronicler. Below these marks there are no values, no person, no meaning of life.

It was not by chance that I called the universal scale of meaningful life values ​​imaginary, but existing. Indeed, this scale is not a ruler that can be “applied” to a person, to his life. Fortunately, humanity has not yet invented such a “Procrustean” line, and God forbid, if it does. What is important here is not millimeters of reference, but the fundamental recognition of the fact that in society there is a certain hierarchy of values, and people have always been attracted by the search for the highest values ​​of life. The solution to the problem of the meaning of life most often meant the discovery and substantiation of such values, under which powerful philosophical and religious teachings were created. In Plato, this is the doctrine of the unconditional good; Aristotle has the ethics of virtues, to which he ranked wisdom, prudence, courage, justice; Augustine Aurelius has the doctrine of divine grace; I. Kant - the ethics of duty (the doctrine of moral maxims); N. Berdyaev - the philosophy of love; in modern philosophy - the ethics of responsibility, etc. There are other, not so definite and justified, but no less interesting solutions to the problem of higher values ​​and the meaning of life. Thus, the well-known humanist A. Schweitzer put forward a thesis opposite to Cartesian - “I think, therefore I exist”: “I am a life that wants to live among a life that wants to live”, from which he derived his main ethical principle - “reverence for life." What I call a "value scale" is a comparison scale, i.e. product of the mental activity of people, this also applies to the highest meaningful values ​​of life. The question can be put like this: do the highest life-meaning values ​​have an objective content, or are they, from beginning to end, the product of the imagination of brilliant thinkers? We, in fact, have already answered this question: the objective content of the highest meaningful values ​​in life is such human activity, which coincides with creative tendencies in human society.

The extreme versatility of such activity cannot but give rise to a variety of answers to the question about the highest values ​​of life, which, no matter how you formulate them, are not able to contain all creative activity without a trace. Adding complexity to this problem is the fact that there is a certain dialectic of relationships between creative and destructive tendencies: creation is associated with destruction, and destruction with creation. Hence the inevitable connection between good and evil, good with non-good, and so on. A one-pole world of values ​​is just as impossible as a one-pole magnet. This does not mean that good and evil, good and bad, etc. are of the same order of values ​​with the opposite sign. Creation always requires more effort than destruction; accordingly, goodness and goodness are, in a volitional sense, values ​​more difficult to achieve than evil and non-goodness.