Dear Jamism,

"Why do people fail to value people?"-- You ask. As a psychologist, I think that people fail to value people because of many reasons. Some reasons may have to do with people's biological inheritance. Psychopaths, for example, are not able, say, to put on another's shoes and, hence, they are deprived of any empathic concerns for others' well being. Other reasons are situational. If people are born and grow up in a competitive, instead a cooperative, atmosphere and environment it is likely that they fail to value people. Other reasons have to do with people's moral development. The less morally developed people are, the more they are likely to fail to value people. The American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg, for example, found that people located at his Stage 1 or Stage 2 of moral reasoning are dominated by egocentric interests and desires and, because of this, think, feel and act without taking into account others' needs, interests and concerns.

Around myself, I perceive that a lot of people are, say, dominated by the gospel of money and greed, not the gospel of love, compassion and empathy. When this is the case we have a lot of people that fail to value other people.

Kind regards,

Orlando

Dear Jamism,

"Why do people fail to value people?"-- You ask. As a psychologist, I think that people fail to value people because of many reasons. Some reasons may have to do with people's biological inheritance. Psychopaths, for example, are not able, say, to put on another's shoes and, hence, they are deprived of any empathic concerns for others' well being. Other reasons are situational. If people are born and grow up in a competitive, instead a cooperative, atmosphere and environment it is likely that they fail to value people. Other reasons have to do with people's moral development. The less morally developed people are, the more they are likely to fail to value people. The American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg, for example, found that people located at his Stage 1 or Stage 2 of moral reasoning are dominated by egocentric interests and desires and, because of this, think, feel and act without taking into account others' needs, interests and concerns.

Around myself, I perceive that a lot of people are, say, dominated by the gospel of money and greed, not the gospel of love, compassion and empathy. When this is the case we have a lot of people that fail to value other people.

Kind regards,

Orlando

Appreciate your answer in sequence dear Vernita Perkins

Ellen Peters

Thank you.

But do you think that the failure to value people phenomenon is reversible? How to treat such people so to save them from potential failure in life and loss of those most valuable individuals such as family? Closer and wider family? What is the gradual way of reversing behaviour of not valuing people? Thanks in advance.

Indeed true Vernita Perkins

Vernita Perkins

Exactly, i agree Vernita Perkins

Narcissism is rampant in all societies and this contribute to the problem.... Childhood trauma, combined with epigenic (Inherited from past ancestors and their trauma) trauma and this is a great place to begin understanding the fundamentals of a Cluster B personality disorder, such as narcissists and their anti-social behavior issues usually related to trauma. This is much more common than most people realize and most of these personality disorders are about selfishness, self-entitlement, and lack of empathy. Empathy is seriously lacking in our society and it is well demonstrated by the lack of kindness and devaluation of others.

Thanks Susan Lillard , we can say that uneducated people tend to do it which is often understandable but indeed many of those are goodhearted and lovely. The problem is that educated, highly educated people fail to value others, empathy, lack of kindness etc. what makes the psycho state more interesting unfortunately. However that is the truth. Why does it happen to educated people or we can say that no real education occurred in such instances while they got the diploma as a paper. Its like a driving licence that some get and still dont know to drive a car while some dont acquire a driving licence but are outstanding drivers, skilful to greater degrees than the driving instructors. These skilful would be the poor i mentioned above. What is your view, referring to everybody who has a view about this?

By the way the drivers with no licence are usually more careful because they know that they may be caught so they value what they have while those who have a driving licence are at times more careless compared to the above. :) it kind of reflects degrees of valuing the other.

I think the opposite. I come from Los Angeles and have experienced many personalities across the oceans. I suggest anyone look up the "Dark triad" and see who they know may fit into this horrible grouping. Its much more common than you may think.

Well Susan Lillard , I may agree with you about the opposite as well but somehow the opposite of your opposite happens what makes it for me particularly interesting how goodness without education can be more pure whilst educated sometimes make it less pure.

Have you researched the Dunning-Kruger Effect? I think this applies to many more than one would imagine.

Its not about education as many of my colleagues are inept to other people. Its about empathy, perception, and life experience. Sensitivity to others cannot be taught, nor can artificial intelligence create it. Its innate, approximately 20% of the population are known to be HSP's (Highly Sensitive People) and this is a wonderful trait usually created by trauma. It also manifests out of box thinking and creativity.

There's a flip side to it, too, but I suggest you study a little of Dr. Elaine Aron's work Some of the most educated of my peers had "idyllic" childhoods and don't possess this trait, even with four PhD's, an MD and DO.

Its about intelligence and sensitivity and that comes from life experience. This is coming from an older person who has experienced and written about this subject in depth. I will be sharing my research, soon. This was a great subject of conversation. Thank you.

Dear Jasmin,

I would like to add something to my previous answer to your question. People offen fail to value people because of a phsychological phenomenon called self-deserving bias. In other words, people are always prone to attributing value to what they do and devalueing or overlooking what others do. This is one of the reason why we know of many people who are in lack of empathy, sympathy, and concern for another's well-being. People tendency to fall prey to the self-deserving bias is a clear manifesation of their egocentric orientation towards other people.

Kind regards,

Orlando

Dear Vernita Perkins,

I feel more than happy to know that you liked my reference to the self-deserving bias.

As a psychologist, I am fully aware that such an egocentric tendency lies at heart of people's failure to value people. Of course, biological and situational variables are also responsible for people's failure to value people,

KInd regards,

Orlando Lourenço

Egoism, lack of love and evil are main reasons people don't value others. People create more enemies for themselves than friends. We always see ourselves as competitors and everyone want to win. Culture and tradition in most cases play major role in the issue.

Under the current economic conditions of collective ego-tyranny, the win/lose model of human exchange is dominant. Judgement and devaluation of the personality are the hidden curriculum in education and training, where quantitative knowledge transfer reigns fully over character development. The behavioral and scientific foundation of this 'social prison machinery' is a technical control paradigm. The switch to win/win models will slowly emerge by revitalizing the role of human communities in decision-making. Over-competition in the materialistic rat race is definitely a modern evil and leads to the devaluation of others.

Most times, envy plays a negative role. And it's detrimental to the learning process because one could have learnt a thing or two from the other who is more expeeienced.

I am not a psychologist, but at its most extreme, someone who fails to value other people are sociopaths or narcissists. Societies that are individualistic, which is promoted by liberal values, tend to promote this. Hence, why bankers and financial professionals who profit off of foreclosing people out of their homes are not met with any penalty, but seen as, "smart people taking advantage of the rules of the game." These individuals gained (financially) and within the system (barely), so it is seen as fair and part of the individual's right to prosper and be happy, etc... even if it was at a greater expense. This is my controversial view, because I know some people will say that theoretically it is meant to be different, etc...but in practice, I think it is being used to care more about "the individual" and less about the collective good.

There could be various reasons. First the person may be so ego-centered that all that matters to that person is themselves and not anybody else. To them other's opinions do not count and they are also poor listeners. They place themselves at the center of the universe. Secondly some are born with character deficiencies which DMS-V classifies under Axis II Personality Disorders.

Dear Vernita Perkins,

I am more than happy to know that you are a fellow psychologist.

As the previous comments show people's failure to value people may be due to biological abnormalities. Psychopats are but an example.

In many cases, people's failure to value other people has to do their low moral, social and interpersonal development. When this is the case, people have difficulties with decentering,

putting on another's shoes, falling prey to the self-serving or self- deserving bias and other egocentric tendencies.

Of course, people's failure to value other people may be due to the social environmnet in which thew were born and grew up. There is mounting evidence that shows that people who live in a competitive rather than a cooperative environment are less likely to value others.

KInd regards to all discussant.

Orlando

Hi Vernita & other posters,

Of course, Vernita, you can be informal and call me Orlando, my first name. I'll call you Vernita, you first name, I suppose.

Even though the term self-deserving bias appears at times, namely in the social psychology literature, the correct term is self-serving bias. Self-serving bias refers to the frequent human propensity to attribute one’s successes to personal characteristics, such as abillity and hard-worker, and so forth, and one’s failures to factors beyond one’s control, such as bad luck, events occuring outside, etc.

The reasons why people tend to personalize success is because it fosters their sense of self-esteem, self-efficacy, internal locus of control, and the like. It is human nature to take credit for their positive achievements and be externalizers regarding their failures. It is also human nature to avoid responsibility for mistakes (i.e., to be externalizers) and take credit for positive achievements (to be internalizers). In other words, people tend to be behaviorists regarding their failures (e.g., "I got a D beause the exam was too difficult") and personolagists regarding their successes (e.g., "I got an B because I am clever)".

In contradistiction, people tend to explain others' failures for internal reasons (e.g. "S/he got an D because s/he is not clever) and others's successes for external reasons ("S/he got an A because the exam was a piece of cake"). The diverse way we judge our and other's successes and failures is called the attribution-fundamental error. There is mounting evidence that shows a positive correlation between people's self-deseving bias and their tendency to commit the attribution-fundamental error, and their low level of social, moral, interpersonal and emotional development. Thus, both the self-serving bias and the attribution-fundamental-error are egocentric and relatively unconscious concerns and manifestations which may lead us to fail to value people, other than ouselves,

I know quite well that, in generally, the USA is a highly competitive, individualist environment with significant cooperative sub-environments, primarily in holistic communities. I experienced this, namely when I was a Researcher Associate at the Dept. of Psychology, Blomington, Indiana University (1997, if am not wrong).

Of course, people also fail to value other people because of the media. Overall, all over the world, namely in Western societes, media value more, say, the gospel of money, greed, individualism and the negative than the gospel of love, empathy, cooperation and the positive. Note that the heroes of peace look pale when compared to the "heroes" of war,

What steps -- you ask -- do I think are necessary to shift this environment to a highly cooperative environment with the focus/goal/intention of collaboration and a high moral (in the holistic sense), collaborative social (meaning inclusive and diverse) and with rigorous interpersonal development?

First of all, it incumbs upon us all to do our best in our professions that speaks in favor of the true, the good, and the beautiful and against the false, the bad, and the ugly. Paraphrasing J.F. Kennedy "ask not what your country can do for you but rather what you can do for your country".

I do not think much of the publish or perish policy that reigns in many universities all over the world, a policy that is mainly due to the USA and that values quantity more than quality. This policy is also frequent in other professions, even though it can have other names. In Academia, the so called blind peer-review system is not always as blind as is claimed and is often subject to inbreeding. I know of this either as an author or a reviewer.

Even though the prevalence of the negative over the positive is a sad reality all over the world, we should not be radical pessimist people. I use to say that the current world is paradoxical in the sense that if we look around, then we can see that manifestations of the false, the bad, and the ugly coexist is the same country and the same individual with manifestations of the true, the good and the beautiful. You even say that the US is a highly competitive, individualist environment with significant cooperative sub-environments, primarily in holistic communities. Right now I am thinking about the just community approach Lawrence Kohlberg introduced is several secondary schools in your country

I hope I has got the gist of the post you adressed to me and that this helps.

Warm regards,

Orlando

I think that people's lack of trust in people is more related to the decrease in trust.

Dear Vernita Perkins

Thank you for the kind comment for my earlier response.

I was a bit dragged away and had no real focus to respond here but willed to take my time and give some constructive contribution.

Indeed, you are right that its not possible to live in afterlife well if in this world there was no well or willingness for the well of all or at least often to oneself. What i see people doing is that they fail to value even themselves after devaluing other people. Indeed when devaluing other people a person just devalues himself/herself.

The philanthropic behaviour of those who secure themselves is a as you mentioned a recorded phenomenon. Those may be educated people but as you mentioned and so did Susan Lillard that education is just part of what makes us emphatic to others. To feel empathy to others goes beyond education but unfortunately something that many learn with life but most actually dont learn.

Sad is that while others look and follow you contribute to others in whatever sense, they sit and use and abuse your contributions for personal needs without acknowledging your contributions. Those are unnaturally self-condemning individuals who as parasites just make a solution harder. In economics we would call them the free-riders. This is an issue but ultimately nothing replaces your feeling of contributions even if all free-riders live better or benefit more. You get the reward here and in hereafter.

And yest Vernita Perkins

I met so many of those who publish writings without knowing how to explain them or communicate about it. Those just look into piling publications to show egocentrically how they have 3 and their friend 2 publications. How to stop this behaviour? These often are the source of the problem of not valuing others while self-praising becomes an occupation. Sadly.

True Ellen Peters

Its Indeed a psychological problem that is hard to fix and needs commitment of the person. The first thing is to accept that one is in trouble and then to try resolve the issue at hand. An ego works there in though as well.

Exactly Orlando M Lourenço and Vernita Perkins

this happens often , the 'self-deserving bias'. Perhaps its normal to like what you do but even to the extent of linking what you do more than what others do but this shall not lead to devalue others work and claim ultimate correctness of your work over all else. That is where egos spark and the battle starts. To cope with this phenomenon is really demanding. Know that better living opportunities are nothing if everyone caught an opportunity and thinks its the best and fails to value others. These may provide you great salaries but wiped away your human dignity. It seems that that is the accepted dignity while those who dont have it are without dignity. It is an interesting experiment that if applied more generally can reosolve much issues of societies.

Thanks Stephen I. Ternyik , how could the qualitative get more attention over quantitative in modern education so to revalue the role of human instead of quantitative data to make life better? What would be the best outcome for this in economics if attempted to change? What may be the alternative? I wonder if Islamic Economics, Banking and Finance industry can play a role to improve greater normative problems inclusive of positivistic matters?

Segun Michael Abegunde thanks, what do you think can lead to overcome culture and tradition while dealing with people? How can a person be taught to forget the culture for a while and deal with the other as a human from somewhere else? Thanks

Dear Sabine Franklin , you are right and not controversial at all. That is the reality. General good is ignored and much more among people who supposed to be the hope of positive change. If a bad person does disappoint you then you may accept it easily but if a good person whom you know or it can refer to organizations that you cherish commits some wrong and persists then it seems painful and paradoxical. How can it happen? that is the question everyone would ask. If the good dont value people how can the bad every hope to change?

Indeed true Arben J Salihu

Those seem like turtles who pull back in a shell to feel more safe. We need to improve their self-confidence. how?

Dear Vernita Perkins

i read your post below:

"As a fellow psychologist (IO Pscyh) operating in competitive private sector industries, I am involved in deep exploration of interpersonal behavior (particularly in relation to effective leadership), examination of collaboration and wellbeing constructs, social neuroscience, social psychology, social issues, and primarily how humans can best coexist, flourish at no cost to the environment or others, and thrive in this life experience...over time. As such, self-serving bias and other egocentric tendencies (as you mentioned) are of great concern to my research lab. Thank you again. This is technology at its best, sharing, digesting and utilizing valuable, processed, and applied information!"

My question is, How much could the results of the study or recommendations be generalised in different environments? I believe you have a greater estimate about this since you are deeply engaged in it.

Maybe Orlando M Lourenço has also unique insights? Thanks.

Dear Vernita Perkins

Thanks to dear Orlando M Lourenço also for his unique and detailed account in answers about the issue at hand. We appreciate both of your insights.

I just wonder if some steps to follow to improve a a human can be applied now while the study is ongoing. How could some steps be identified for every person to follow and so value others?

Thanks to others who also contributed and will contribute continually as the discussion is open for further insights.

Srini Vasan indeed thanks for your contribution to say that some dont listen and so fail to value others. That is what Orlando M Lourenço and Vernita Perkins

This is indeed a direct and precise description of what frequently or better said all the time happens in our circles where someone who succeeded never take into account that it happened due to luck, destiny or someone just permitted a person to succeed.

Maybe sometimes someone is allowed to win just to get better but in reality its an experiment that ends if the person gets better in e.g. studies, work etc.

Hence its also related to what Stephen I. Ternyik mentioned in relation to our economic world today where everything is quantitative and money oriented.

Hence, what can be the steps to add more quality or some common principles that may unite our differences? And also cool off those who are self-centric etc?

Thanks

Dear All,

I feel more than happy to know that my reference to the self- serving bias and the fundamental-education error had contributed a bit about the reasons why some people failure to valuee other people. There is mounting evidence shows that it is often the case that some people fail to value other people because of their difficulty with putting, say, on another's agoes. This difficulty is a manifestation of the self-serving bias. Needless to say, the more people are morally developed, the less the tend to fall prey to the self. deserving bias.

Kind regards,

Orlando