Assessments based on the science of Axiology
Our assessments measures the patterns and clarity of thinking of the participant as well as the effects that stress has had on a person’s ability to think about different things, how clearly a person’s “Value Vision” is developed, what dimensions a person is most and least attentive to, and the different balances in a person’s thinking.
This forced ranking of representative statements distinguishes individuals’ values in terms of intrinsic, extrinsic and systemic dimensions. The intrinsic dimension involves singularity and uniqueness and is required for empathy and self-esteem. The extrinsic dimension involves the ability to deal with the abstraction of properties and relative comparisons and is required for practical, social and political thinking and for personal confidence and competitiveness. The systemic dimension involves formal constructs and absolutes and is required for planning, measurement, and one’s own self-image and standards.
Use and Benefits of our Assessments
As with other instruments, our assessment has specific and particular uses in the marketplace. Its distinctiveness is threefold:
- The words and phrases on the test are formal representations so the person taking the test cannot figure out what is being measured.
- Because of the simplicity of the instrument, persons taking the test do not experience traumas that often accompany other tests.
- Little skill and time are required to administer and take the test.
Bottom line benefits from these three features are that: it is almost impossible for the participant to cheat on the test, the test does not cause the participant to become anxious or troubled and little expense is incurred for the administration of the test.
Because our assessment identifies a person’s Value Structure, the results are useful in many different ways:
- Greater self-understanding
- Designing of training that addresses the sources of the weaknesses and strengths
- Motivation and drive source identification
- Team compatibility and sources of “Natural Stresses”
- Partnership compatibility and sources of stresses
- Vocational counseling
- Problem employee counseling
The assessments are also used in the assessment of present employees and groups of employees for: team building, personal and managerial growth and development, designing and measuring training specific to the needs of a group, team design – assembling a team for a specific function, monitoring integration of new employees, partnership maximization, and problem employee counseling and training.
Unique Characteristics of our Assessment
- It is reliable and proven to be stable for a three-month interval of time. For a test’s scores to be reliable it must be proven to be so over extended periods of time. It’s reliability has been proven over periods of months and years.
- It measures the sources of behaviour and attitudes, not the behaviours or attitudes themselves. Since the assessment is based on Formal Axiology, it measures peoples’ thinking structures. These structures are the sources of personality characteristics, behavioural choices, and the mental maps for decision-making.
The isomorphic relationships of mathematical systems and the dimensional characteristics of the profile make it objective and easy to score. This objectivity of the assessment enables researchers and human development specialists to model and objectify thinking, behaviour and decision-making with mathematical models. These mathematical systems provided a system that is void of subjective contamination that is a hurdle for users of psychological instruments.
Axiology: “The branch of philosophy dealing with the nature of value and the types of value, as in morals, aesthetics, religion, and metaphysics.” Webster’s New World Dictionary, 2nd EditionPeople are different. They do not look alike. They do not all sound the same. And they all think differently. Axiology is the science that studies how people think. Specifically, Axiologists study how people determine the value of different things. This is how individuals compare things and how those value assignments either represent or distort reality.To value is to set priorities. It is to choose one thing over another. It is to think about things in relation to each other and decide that one is better than the other. It is to decide what is “good”. All persons assign higher value to some things and lower value to others. People assign these valuations in a consistent pattern that is unique to them. This valuation process is actually one’s habit of thinking. It involves filtering, processing, storing, and analyzing data. It includes thinking about objects, discerning the different aspects of things, making judgments, and choosing. Our unique pattern of thinking and assigning value is called our Value Structure. People often confuse value with values. Values are specific items that people stand for, believe in, or deem important. To value is to think, to assign meaning and richness of properties to reality. A Value Structure is the thinking map a person uses to reach conclusions about things. Value is thinking that values are important objects of our thinking. People value to arrive at their values.
One way to describe the difference between value and values is by using the field of Color Vision. We can compare value to one’s ability to see different colors. The science of Color Vision studies one’s ability to see and differentiate colors as Axiology studies one’s ability to distinguish conceptually between different things. We can compare values to different colors or the linking of one color (Red) as more favorable, significant, acceptable, or valuable than another (Pink). To say, “Bill can value colors” means that Bill can see and distinguish between or among colors, he has good color vision. To say, “Bill values red more than blue” means that Bill prefers red to blue. To say, “Bill can value” means that Bill can see clearly and think about the different aspects of different things without getting those aspects confused with each other. To say, “Bill values people more than money” means that Bill likes people more than money and wants money to work toward the benefit of people.
Value = Color Vision = Ability to Choose
Values = Favorite Colors = Choices
- Nobel Prize Nominee for contribution to value measurement using Axiology
- “Father” of Axiology
Article written by Dr. JOHN W. DAVIS, Professor and Department Head, Emeritus The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Robert S. Hartman, Research Professor of Philosophy at the University of Tennessee and the National University of Mexico, died on September 20. 1973 and was buried near his home in Cuernavaca, Mexico. He was born in Berlin on January 27, 1910. He attended the German College of Political Science, the University of Paris, the London School of Economics, and Berlin University, where he received the LL.B. in 1932. For a brief period, he taught at Berlin University and served as an assistant district court judge.
As a school boy in the Germany of the Kaiser Wilhelm II, he was required at his gymnasium each day to repeat the loyalty oath: “I was born to die for Germany.” He became convinced that this oath was false. He believed in the infinite value of a human life, and that the state has a moral obligation to keep violent hands off that life. War, he thought, is madness. His rejection of all violent creeds, whether of Communism, Nazism, or Fascism, which he expressed in speeches and articles, brought him into conflict with the Nazi party, and forced him to leave Germany to escape imprisonment. Using a fake passport, he left Germany in 1932 for England. In order to hamper the Nazis in their efforts to keep track of him, he changed his name (Robert Schirokauer) legally to that on the passport, Robert S. (for Schirokauer) Hartman. For the next two years he worked as a professional photographer in London and Paris. During this period he and a young German rocket inventor attempted to interest the British government in the use of rockets for postal service. The inventor, Gerhard Zucker, was later executed by the Nazis for “an attempt to sell an invention important for Germany to a foreign power.”
From 1934 to 1941, still under surveillance by the Nazis, he was Walt Disney’s representative, first in Scandinavia, later in Mexico and Central America. In 1938, using a Swedish alien’s passport, he and his wife, the former Rita Emanuel, and son, Jan, left Europe for Mexico, where they lived until their immigration in 1941 to the United States, where they later became citizens.
Dr. Hartman’s first teaching position in the United States was at Lake Forest Academy in Illinois. While there, he enrolled at Northwestern University (Ph.D., 1946). He later taught at the College of Wooster in Ohio (1945-48), and at the Ohio State University (1948-56). He was a visiting professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1955-56), and at Yale (1966). He was Smith Mundt State Department Research Fellow and Exchange Professor at the National University of Mexico (1956-57). He held more than fifty lectureships in the United States, Canada, Latin America, and Europe. He was a research professor of philosophy at the National University of Mexico from 1957 until his death in 1973, and at the University of Tennessee from 1968 until his death in 1973.
As the author of more than ten books and over 100 articles, and translator of six books, he acquired a world-wide reputation. While an extremely industrious and productive scholar, he yet found time to carry on a very intensive correspondence with many persons throughout the world who had become acquainted with his work. He and his wife were cosmopolitan, with friends everywhere, many of whom they entertained in their lovely Cuernavaca home.
His life-long quest was to answer the question, “What is good?” – And to answer the question in such a way that good could be organized to help preserve and enhance the value of human life. He believed that he had found this answer in the axiom upon which he based his science of Axiology, “A thing is good when it fulfills its concept.” His formal axiology, as the ordering logic for the value sciences, receives its most complete expression in his major work, The Structure of Value: Foundations of Scientific Axiology (1967), which one reviewer described as “one of the most constructive and revolutionary undertaking suggested in modern times.” He applied his value method to economics in the Profit Sharing Manual (1948), Die Partnerschaft von Kapital und Arbeit: Theorie und Praxis eines neuen Wirtschaftssystems (1953), and La participacion de utilidades en Mexico (1963). In the field of psychology, he applied his axiology in The Hartman Value Inventory, a value profile, widely used in Mexico and by some psychiatrists in the United States, which measures with exactness the character of an individual. This profile exists in English, German, Spanish, Swedish, Japanese, Hebrew, Russian, and in other languages. Before his death, five of the largest corporations in this country used the Hartman value concepts in developing the sensitivity of their executives to the human value aspects of management decisions.
His international reputation and the esteem in which he is held by scholars throughout the world are reflected in Value and Valuation: Axiological Studies in Honor of Robert S. Hartman (1972). He was much loved by his many friends. Many of his students and colleagues would agree with the sentiment expressed in the above work by one of them: “I have never known a more brilliant, comprehensive, creative mind; or a more enthusiastic, eloquent teacher.”