A note of subject-decomposing on Ralph Barton Perry's thinking on axiology: for MBA students

A note of subject-decomposing on Ralph Barton Perry's thinking on axiology: for MBA students

Highlight 8 ideas of Ralph Barton Perry's book of General Theory of Value (1926) and 2 claims of it in terms of Toulmin's model of argument.

Ralph Barton Perry’s General Theory of Value argues that value is not an abstract property floating free of human life, but something grounded in interest: an object becomes valuable when it is taken up by some subject’s purposive concern. In Toulmin’s terms, Perry’s central thesis can be treated as a claim supported by his analysis of human motivation and action.

Eight core ideas

1.    Value is tied to interest. Perry’s basic formula is that an object has value when interest is taken in it, or more simply, “X is valuable = interest is taken in X”.

2.    Value is relational, not absolute. A thing counts as valuable only in relation to an interested subject, so value is a specific relation rather than an isolated property.

3.    Interest is more than liking. Perry uses “interest” broadly to cover liking, desire, aversion, will, refusal, seeking, and avoiding.

4.    Human action is purposive. He treats interest as bound up with action directed toward expected outcomes, not random behavior.

5.    Expectation matters. A person’s bias toward an object is shaped by what they expect from it, not just by the object itself.

6.    Governing propensity guides choice. Interest is organized by a dominant set or orientation that determines what counts as useful, threatening, or desirable.

7.    Means and ends are both value-laden. An object can be valuable as an end in itself or as a means to some further end.

8.    Values can be positive or negative. Perry’s framework includes attraction and repulsion, approval and disapproval, not only admiration or preference.

Two Toulmin-style claims

Toulmin element	Perry-based claim		How it works
Toulmin element		Perry-based claim		How it works
Claim 1		Value is constituted by interest.		This is Perry’s main conclusion: if interest is taken in something, that thing is valuable in the basic sense .
Claim 2		A person’s valuation can be explained by the governing propensity behind their purposive action.		The warrant is Perry’s psychology of action: what a person expects and aims at determines what they treat as valuable .

Brief Toulmin mapping

For the first claim, the grounds are Perry’s analysis of ordinary valuation and his definition of value as “object of any interest,” while the warrant is that human beings consistently invest objects with worth through concern and response. For the second claim, the grounds are Perry’s account of purposive action, expectation, and governing propensity, and the warrant is that motives shape what people select, pursue, and rank as important. Toulmin’s model identifies a claim, supporting grounds, and a warrant that links them.

How are the 8 ideas of Ralph Barton Perry related to the axiology sub-topic on aesthetics?

Ralph Barton Perry’s eight axiological ideas are directly related to aesthetics because he treats aesthetic value as one special realm of “value‑in‑interest” within his broader theory.

1. Value as interest taken in an object

Perry’s core formula “X is valuable = interest is taken in X” applies to aesthetic objects (artworks, landscapes, performances).

·        Aesthetic value then becomes the value of something when it engages “aesthetic interest”—a kind of attention that is not merely practical or moral, but focused on form, expression, and beauty.

2. Value as relational, not absolute

Aesthetic value is not stuck inside the painting or poem, but arises in the relation between the artwork and an experiencing subject.

·        What looks “beautiful” or “moving” to one observer may be indifferent to another, which fits Perry’s insistence that value depends on the subject–object relation of interest.

3. Interest is broader than liking

Perry’s richer notion of interest (including attraction, aversion, expectation, and purposive attention) fits how people engage with art.

·        A viewer may feel fascinated, disturbed, or repelled by an artwork, yet still treat it as aesthetically valuable; this shows that aesthetic value is not simple “liking,” but a complex affective–cognitive interest.

4. Human action is purposive

When people visit galleries, collect art, or create works, they act purposively toward aesthetic ends (appreciation, expression, fame, contemplation).

·        Perry’s axiology lets you treat these aesthetic motives as purposive interests, so the “value of art” is inseparable from the aims it serves in human life.

5. Expectation matters

Perry’s idea that valuation depends on what one expects from an object applies clearly to aesthetic experience.

·        A person may expect a painting to move, challenge, or comfort them; aesthetic value then depends partly on whether the artwork meets, exceeds, or disrupts those expectations.

6. Governing propensity guides choice

In a person’s hierarchy of values, aesthetic interest can be more or less dominant: some lives are organized around art, while others subordinate it to moral or economic concerns.

·        Perry’s “governing propensity” helps you analyze conflicts such as when aesthetic autonomy clashes with moral or social demands (e.g., controversial art vs. public norms).

7. Means and ends are both value‑laden

In aesthetics, the work of art itself can be an end, while also serving means (education, therapy, status display).

·        Perry’s distinction lets you ask whether an artwork is valued “for its own sake” (autonomous aesthetic value) or mainly as a tool for profit, propaganda, or prestige (instrumental value).

8. Values can be positive or negative

Beauty is not Perry’s only aesthetic category; he recognizes that ugliness, horror, or dissonance can also be objects of aesthetic interest.

·        A tragic play or disturbing image can be negatively valued in moral terms (painful, unsettling) yet still carry high aesthetic value because it intensifies or clarifies human experience.

---

In short, Perry’s eight ideas let you treat aesthetics as a sub‑domain of axiology: aesthetic value is just value in a special kind of interest (aesthetic interest), subject to the same relational, interest‑based structure as moral, economic, or social values.

 

Illustrate the 8 ideas a bit more with reference to the MBA research theme of "an ethical analysis of the negative consequences of corporate downsizing to different stakeholder groups due to adoption of AI in business practice in the Hong Kong Banking sector"

You can use Perry’s eight ideas to reframe “value” for each stakeholder group in your MBA dissertation topic: “An ethical analysis of the negative consequences of corporate downsizing to different stakeholder groups due to adoption of AI in business practice in the Hong Kong banking sector.”

Below I sketch how each of Perry’s ideas can be illustrated through this specific case.

---

1. Value is tied to interest

In Hong Kong banking, AI‑driven downsizing reshapes whose interests count as “valuable.”

·        For shareholders and top management, cutting staff with AI is “valuable” because their interest is in cost efficiency and higher returns.

·        For retrenched employees, that same decision is a negative value: their interest in job security and dignity is ignored, so the same “cost saving” is not valuable to them.

This shows how Perry’s “X is valuable = interest is taken in X” helps you track which stakeholder interests are foregrounded or silenced in AI‑led restructuring.

---

2. Value is relational, not absolute

The “value” of AI‑enabled downsizing is not inherent in the technology itself, but in how it relates to different stakeholders.

·        For bank boards, the relation is between AI and profitability; downsizing appears “rational” and “efficient.”

·        For frontline staff and middle‑management, the relation is between AI and job loss, reduced income, and career disruption; then the same policy looks exploitative.

Your ethical analysis can thus map these relations: who defines what is “valuable” and whose interests are discounted in the process.

---

3. Interest is more than liking

Perry’s broad sense of “interest” as including desire, aversion, refusal, seeking, and avoiding fits well with how workers react to AI‑driven job cuts.

·        Employees may desire training in AI tools, but at the same time avert the risk of being displaced.

·        Unions may refuse to accept opaque AI‑based performance metrics as grounds for layoffs, even if managers “like” the efficiency gains.

This helps you argue that ethical evaluation must attend not only to overt preferences, but also to fear, resistance, and felt threats to dignity and livelihood.

---

4. Human action is purposive

Perry’s insistence that interest is tied to purposive action lets you critically examine the goals behind AI‑driven downsizing.

·        Banks may frame AI adoption as aimed at “better service” and “risk control,” but the downsizing part reveals a competing purpose: cost‑driven profit maximization.

·        When AI is used to justify layoffs instead of reskilling, the purpose is not value‑neutral; it is a choice privileging certain ends (short‑term efficiency) over others (employee welfare).

Your analysis can then ask: whose purposes are served, and whose are undermined, by this AI‑driven restructuring?

---

5. Expectation matters

Perry emphasizes that valuation depends on what a person expects from an object.

·        Employees may expect skill development and long‑term careers in Hong Kong banking, but find AI‑driven restructurings instead signal precarity and obsolescence.

·        Customers may expect better service through AI, yet experience dehumanized interactions or opaque automated decisions.

This lets you build an ethical critique around unmet expectations and the sense of betrayal when AI‑led downsizing breaks implicit career or social contracts.

---

6. Governing propensity guides choice

Perry’s idea of a governing propensity (dominant orientation shaping what is treated as valuable) helps explain why banks keep prioritizing AI‑driven cost‑cutting.

·        A “governing propensity” toward financial performance and shareholder value leads banks to treat staff as variable costs rather than human beings.

·        An alternative, more ethical propensity might prioritize social contribution, employee well‑being, and long‑term trust in the financial system.

You can use this to argue that ethical value change requires shifting the governing propensity of bank leadership, not just “tweaking” AI tools.

---

7. Means and ends are both value‑laden

Both the AI tools and the downsizing outcomes carry value, in Perry’s relational sense.

·        AI is valuable as a means to efficiency, but may be negatively valuable when it becomes a means to dehumanize or marginalize workers.

·        Downsizing is treated as a means to profitability, but for employees it is an end in itself: loss of identity, status, and social role.

Your ethical analysis can thus show that ethics must assess both the instrumental morality of AI use and the intrinsic harm to people whose lives are restructured without consent.

---

8. Values can be positive or negative

Perry’s openness to positive and negative valuations (attraction and repulsion, approval and disapproval) is crucial for your stakeholder‑based ethics.

·        Shareholders may approve of AI‑driven downsizing as a rational business move.

·        Employees, families, and communities may disapprove of it as socially irresponsible and unjust.

By mapping these conflicting evaluations across stakeholder groups in Hong Kong banking, your MBA research can show how AI‑driven downsizing produces simultaneous winners and losers, and therefore cannot be ethically neutral.

---

How this helps your MBA theme

Using Perry’s eight ideas, you can:

·        Build a value‑based stakeholder map showing whose interests are treated as valuable (shareholders, regulators, AI vendors) and whose are devalued (displaced workers, affected communities).

·        Ground your ethical critique in the idea that AI‑driven downsizing is not “just business,” but a value‑laden choice privileging certain governing propensities over others.

 

References

Here are two academic references on Ralph Barton Perry’s axiology that you can cite in Harvard style for your MBA work on value‑based ethics and AI‑driven downsizing.

1.    Primary source (Perry’s own book)
Perry, R.B. (1926) General theory of value: its meaning and basic principles construed in terms of interest. New York: Longmans, Green and Co.

2.    Secondary academic article on Perry’s value theory
Murphey, M.G. (1970) ‘Perry’s two theories of value’, The Journal of Philosophy, 67(17), pp. 613–618. doi:10.2307/2379765.

These two will give you both Perry’s original axiology framework and a scholarly critique/analysis of his theory of value, which you can then connect to your stakeholder‑based ethical analysis of AI‑driven downsizing in Hong Kong banking.

        A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.

A note on research philosophies and MBA dissertation project background discussion

A note on research philosophies and MBA dissertation project background discussion 

I am a part-time MBA student, and I have question to ask about dissertation report writing. My question is: how do the research philosophy chosen for my dissertation work affect the relative attention paid to dissertation project background aspects with regard to: (1) the academic background (e.g. on research issues), (2) on the general and business background (e.g. public media-reported issues) and (3) the researcher positionality background. It would be helpful to clarify your discussion with reference to the MBA research theme of "business strategies to deal with the tourist misbehavior problems in Hong Kong in 2026".

Research philosophy shapes how you construct the background sections of your MBA dissertation by influencing the emphasis on objectivity, context, and personal insight. For a theme like business strategies addressing tourist misbehavior in Hong Kong in 2026—such as violent incidents in serviced apartments or unlicensed tour groups crowding sites—philosophies like positivism, interpretivism, and pragmatism dictate varying attention to academic literature, general/business contexts, and your positionality as a Hong Kong-based researcher.

Positivism

Positivism prioritizes objective, measurable facts, so academic background receives heavy emphasis through reviews of empirical studies on tourist behavior patterns, like psychological closeness reducing misbehavior. General and business background gets concise coverage of verifiable issues, such as 2026 Golden Week complaints about forced shopping or trail sign removals, focusing on quantifiable impacts like tourism revenue. Researcher positionality is minimal or absent, as the approach assumes researcher neutrality to maintain scientific detachment.

Interpretivism

Interpretivism emphasizes subjective meanings, balancing academic background with deep dives into theoretical debates on cultural perceptions of misbehavior, such as compatriot biases in tourism studies. General and business background expands richly on media-reported nuances, like local frustrations with mainland tour groups eating in streets or unlicensed campsite operations in Hong Kong. Positionality demands extensive attention, detailing your Hong Kong residency, MBA studies, and potential biases in interpreting misbehavior as a local, to enhance reflexivity.

Pragmatism

Pragmatism mixes approaches for practical outcomes, giving balanced academic background by integrating quantitative studies (e.g., misbehavior stats) with qualitative theories on strategies like norm reminders. General and business background focuses actionably on 2026 issues, such as government crackdowns on malpractices during holidays, linking to strategies like stricter tour controls. Positionality is addressed moderately, noting your practitioner lens (e.g., finance background) only if it aids real-world recommendations for Hong Kong tourism firms.

        A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.

A note on study materials to use for the literature review task: for MBA students

A note on study materials to use for the literature review task: for MBA students

 

I am a part-time MBA student, and I have a query about references used in the literature review task of doing dissertation projects. Am I correct to say that the priority for article review is to study peer reviewed articles from academic journals, rather than articles published in professional magazines. Secondly, it is preferable to study books published by famous business (e.g. Harvard Business Review press) than books written by celebrity CEOs on their thinking on management, marketing and people management, etc. Could clarify these queries to me?

You’re thinking about this in exactly the right way. Let’s separate your two questions and tighten the principles so you can justify your choices to a supervisor or examiner.

---

1. Journals vs professional magazines

For an MBA dissertation literature review, peer‑reviewed academic journal articles should be your primary sources.

Key reasons:

·        Peer review and scholarly purpose
Peer‑reviewed journals use external expert reviewers to evaluate methods, theory, and contribution before publication, so they are treated as higher‑quality evidence than material in magazines or non‑reviewed outlets.
Scholarly journals are written for researchers and advanced students, include detailed methods and references, and aim to build theory and evidence.

·        Magazines and trade/professional outlets
Trade or professional magazines (including many “industry” or practitioner magazines) are aimed at practitioners and tend to focus on trends, cases, and opinions, often without full data, methods, or references.
They are useful for context, examples, and understanding current practice, but they normally sit as secondary sources in a dissertation, not the core of the literature review.

So your first claim is basically right, with a nuance:

·        In your literature review, prioritize peer‑reviewed journal articles and academic books as the backbone of your argument.

·        You can still cite high‑quality professional or trade sources (e.g., McKinsey, industry reports, practitioner magazines) sparingly to show practice relevance, market context, or current issues, but not as the main theoretical or empirical foundation.

A supervisor reading your dissertation expects the review to show mastery of the academic scholarship, not just what practitioners are saying this year.

---

2. Academic business books vs “celebrity CEO” books

For books, it’s helpful to think in terms of purpose and publisher:

·        Academic and research‑based business books
Books from university presses or serious business presses (including Harvard Business Review Press) are usually grounded in systematic research, clear conceptual frameworks, and extensive referencing.
These are generally appropriate to treat almost like long journal articles: you can use them to support theory, definitions, and well‑established frameworks (e.g., strategy, leadership theories, organizational behavior).

·        Popular/celebrity CEO books
Books written by famous CEOs or entrepreneurs are often memoirs, narratives, or advice grounded mainly in personal experience rather than rigorous empirical research.
They can be valuable as illustrative case material or to show how a concept plays out in practice, but they are not usually accepted as strong evidence for theory testing or building your conceptual framework in an academic dissertation.

So your second intuition is also broadly correct, again with nuance:

·        Yes, it is preferable to lean on reputable, research‑based business books (including those from respected academic/business presses) over purely anecdotal “CEO wisdom” books when constructing your literature review.

·        But you do not have to avoid CEO books entirely. They can be cited in small doses for:

·        Concrete examples or quotes illustrating a phenomenon

·        A contrast between “what practice assumes” and “what research finds”

·        Case‑style discussion in your background or discussion chapter

In grading terms, examiners tend to reward dissertations whose references are dominated by peer‑reviewed articles and academic books, with only a limited number of practitioner or anecdotal sources.

---

3. A simple prioritization rule you can use

When deciding what to read and cite, a practical priority ranking for an MBA dissertation is:

1.    Peer‑reviewed journal articles in reputable scholarly journals in your field (top priority for theory, models, empirical evidence).

2.    Academic or research‑based books (university presses, strong business presses like HBR Press, etc.).

3.    High‑quality practitioner and professional sources (e.g., industry reports, consulting firm white papers, central bank/IMF/OECD reports, serious trade journals) mainly for context and current practice.

4.    Popular press and celebrity CEO books for anecdotal insight and illustrative cases, used sparingly and clearly labelled as practitioner perspective rather than academic evidence.

A good rule of thumb: if someone looked only at your reference list, it should clearly look like an academic project, not an airport‑bookstore business book.

 

I come across some easy to read books on management subjects, but I am not sure they should be used for the literature review task of my MBA dissertation work, as the book names ends with words such as "marketing for dummies", "marketing for idiots" and "marketing for beginners".

Those “for dummies / for idiots / for beginners” books are very useful for learning, but they are usually not appropriate as core sources in an MBA dissertation literature review.

---

What those books are good at

Beginner‑oriented series (like “For Dummies”) are designed to give a broad, simplified overview of a subject for non‑experts. They focus on accessibility, plain language, and quick orientation, and often avoid technical depth, detailed theory, and formal referencing.

They are excellent as a starting point for your own understanding, especially if you are new to a topic and want to get comfortable with basic terms and ideas before you read journal articles.

---

Why they are weak as dissertation references

For an MBA dissertation, examiners and supervisors expect your literature review to be grounded primarily in peer‑reviewed journal articles and academic books.

Compared with those, beginner books usually:

·        Do not present original research, detailed methods, or formal evidence.

·        Offer limited depth and nuance, which is essential for postgraduate‑level critical discussion.

·        Are written for a general audience, not for scholarly debate or theory building.

Guides for MBA students consistently stress prioritizing peer‑reviewed journals and scholarly books found via academic databases and university libraries to ensure rigor and credibility.

So, for your reference list, these “for beginners” books are usually either:

·        Not included at all, or

·        Included at most once or twice as background reading, not as key support for your arguments.

 

        A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.