Are Value Judgements Subjective?

From my understanding most definitions I see say yes. I'm kind of confused by that as it implies we can't run the numbers or look at the evidence of the impact on something.  I understand somethings might be close but even those things require looking at the evidence and even if it might be subjective in deciding, the long term outcome or claim is objective. 

A random example. Should every school have a Math Department?  If I said Yes using facts on the use of  very good studies on the long term for the students which show a lower crime rate, more productive, higher GDP growth, higher life satisfaction, better problem solving skills. And then If I said no I don't want too pay an extra 200$ a year in taxes because I like my money are they both equitable?

Yes, they are subjective, and yes, you can run the numbers and still use evidence.

People who share many cultural values tend to have similar values... this is why societies typically work. For example, just about everyone would value lower crime rate, higher GDP, life satisfaction, etc. But people also value $200 extra spending per year. One needs to make a strong case that goes beyond facts and data and also appeals to emotion as to why their argument is better. Facts and data help, but one must be reminded of Aristotle's rhetorical triangle (https://www.lsu.edu/hss/english/files/university_writing_files/item35402.pdf).

A value is always subjective. As is often my style, I start with a definition. “Value” is that which one acts to gain and keep. The concept of “value” presupposes an answer to the question: of value to whom and for what?

Hi, Alexander!

         Defining “value judgement” in a way that includes the notion of subjectively is question begging because whether or not value judgements as such are subjective is a matter of controversy, as a survey of stances on the issue in philosophy and religion makes obvious. Aristoteleans, for instance, argue that some value judgements are objective. Moral realists maintain that there are objective moral values and, therefore, maintain that some value judgements (especially, ones about moral values) are objective. Sometimes, religious adherents maintain that value judgements coming from their religious beliefs are objective.

         My position is that some value judgements are not subjective. As is common among philosophers, my stance on the issue is influenced by my philosophy of nature. An Aristotelean philosophy of nature, which I think is correct, includes intrinsic teleology and universal essences. Due to this, an Aristotelean philosophy of nature implies an objective, factual standard of goodness, badness, better and worse. Morality is a special case of the more general concept of goodness, and so there are objective moral values, too, on my view.

         I won’t argue for all of this now. (Which is not a total disadvantage because not everyone else here defended their contrary position with an argument.) The takeaway from me is that there are considerations on all sides of the debate and a question-begging definition does not settle the matter. Also, that my answer is no. 

Thank you, Alexander.

From, Kaiden 

Yes, they are subjective. Studying cognitive biases can help you to better understand values, as values are rooted in biases. For example, "a lower crime rate, more productive, higher GDP growth, higher life satisfaction, better problem solving skills" are all biases or preferences, as well as not wanting to pay an extra $200 a year.