I have different values to you

[WhatIsThisMad]

AIBU to think this is the new way of saying 'i don't like you or your views and I'm better than you and my views are the only right ones, but I don't want to sound superior or that I'm putting you down or that I'm up myself'.

Feels like this is the new 'polite' (maybe woke) way of criticising someone and putting them down in a way that makes you sound superior without vocalising you think you are superior.

'we just have different values' is a term I hear alot recently (not usually directed at me, but) if directed at me it feels like a wrapped up criticism to which I have no recourse (hope that's the right spelling!)

Mmm.. in the instances I've observed, it's more the other way round. Eg.

Person A trying to 'educate' and thrust views on person

Person B, I take your views on board but not sure I agree completely

Person A, well we just have different values

About time people acknowledged the space within a relationship for differing opinions

I think it can be a criticism, a way of saying "I think your values are wrong", but said in a way that is difficult to argue against because it holds truth. I do not like statements that shut down discussion or invalidate so I would never use that term because it could be viewed in that way.

But saying that I do think I have heard it more recently as a simple statement of fact. A way of saying there is no point in having a debate about something that each person or group feels strongly about in opposing terms. There are a lot of things to talk about and it is a waste of everyone's time and energy to try and convince another person of a viewpoint that just isn't comprehensible to them or their life?

There is a benefit to us seeing this in society. And for this view just to come under a "live and let live" attitude, isn't there?

I hear a lot of opinions that I keenly disagree with and I don't often get the chance to discuss them in detail, so I have had to just let it go and think to myself "well, we have different values..." 😁

I've heard a slightly different phrase with a similar meaning where when they don't agree with someone's viewpoint they say "we'll just have to agree to differ". It's basically a polite way of saying you're talking bolox... 😆 or at least that's how I take it...

It's the complete opposite. It's saying I don't agree but that's ok

I think ‘agree to differ’ does not cast aspersions the other persons view in the same way ‘different values’ does. ‘Different values’ implies theirs are right and yours are wrong.

Mmm.. in the instances I've observed, it's more the other way round. Eg.
Person A trying to 'educate' and thrust views on person
Person B, I take your views on board but not sure I agree completely
Person A, well we just have different values

So it's an updated version of we'll have to agree to disagree?

Or is person A just repeating dogma/phrases with limited understanding and can't actually argue or back up or defend what they believe so can't handle B questions so trot out this phase to stop the conversation.

I still sounds fairly polite way of stopping a potentially divisive conversation - some divisive conversation do need to be had but time and place are important.

No-one who says they have different values is saying the other person is better than them. It's phrased as if it's a neutral observation, but if it's only said by someone who thinks their way is better, it always implies criticism of the person it's addressed to.

We do all have different values. Not better or worse necessarily, but different.

If you don't think your values are any better, how did you choose them? With a flip of a coin?

I'm sure you can come up with a contrived example that is neutral, but in general "values" are moral beliefs, if someone is different to you, then by definition their belief is wrong.

The alternative is
You believe you ought to be truthful, but it's fine for other people to lie?
You believe you ought to be generous, but it's no problem if other people want to be selfish?
You're a pacifist, but if other people want to start wars, you wouldn't criticise them?
And so on.

It's a phrase that I use fairly often, and when I say it I mean that we disagree but there's no sense in arguing over it because the reasons for the disagreement are value-dependent. Imagine disagreeing over a policy - I could say that I think it's a good idea because I value X over Y, but I understand why someone who values Y over X would be opposed to it. Where the values in question are liberty vs security, or individualism vs collectivism, or any other pair you like.

So yes on one level I do think my values are 'better' than the other person's - otherwise I wouldn't hold them. But what I'm usually trying to convey is that I recognise that other people do have different hierarchies of values and that's fine and it's not my place to impose my value system on others. I understand that, believing what they believe, they take the political stance they do. Agree to disagree.

It's not usually a comment on morality, because if I thought someone was morally wrong that would go beyond just 'different values'.

I've never heard anyone say this but I'd assume it was a more long winded version of "you do you"

If this affects you then could you be insecure about your own values?

I wouldn’t like to hear this phrase either, especially if someone was making assumptions about my values. I think it sounds patronising in a way that, “we have differing views” doesn’t.

I don’t think it’s a superiority thing. It just means you have different beliefs/priorities/things that are important. If I prioritised sending my kids to dance classes because I believed it was good for their motor development while my DP wanted to prioritise sending them to swimming lessons because water safety was more important to him, then you could argue we have different values regarding kid’s exercise.

I don't understand what the problem is. It's just a way of saying 'We'll have to agree to disagree'.

People do have different values that influence the way they feel and act. It's not a problem for them to say that. For example, person A might be an ardent supporter of monarchy and person B might be an equally ardent republican. It is clear that person A thinks the tradition and continuity of a monarchy is the most important thing, while person B thinks that fairness is more important, even if it comes at the price of constitutional stability. It would be perfectly fair and polite and not remotely judgemental to say 'Ah, well, I think just have different values, then'. It's just acknowledging that different things are important to different people.

Maybe 'i disagree with your view on X, y, z' and then discuss it

But what would the discussion achieve? You already know that you don't agree on the matter. Talking about it for twenty minutes isn't going to change each other's minds. Which is exactly what people mean when they say 'We have different values' - that there isn't going to a middle ground because it's a matter of opinion and not fact. It would be like having an argument about whether purple or green is a nicer colour.

I think it is absolutely this.

Values are not the same as morals.

Morals are ethical guidelines – what to do and how to behave based on ideas of right and wrong.

Values are things that are important to you in life – you value them highly, hence the name.

For some people, freedom is more important to them than stability, so they might choose to go freelance in a less financially secure job than someone whose values were the other way around. That's not a moral judgement, it's a priority of preference.

Your values might inform your moral choices, but they're not the same thing.

And most of us don't 'choose' our morals or our values any more consciously than a coin-flip anyway – they're largely unconscious consequences of upbringing, family and cultural context, and life experience.

I’ve said it to family members when it’s clear that we’re never going to agree. My SIL is very right leaning in her views and I am not. I have to put up with her, so there’s no point getting into an argument about whether food banks are keeping lazy people dependent and other such actual conversations I’ve had with her.

She’ll never change her view and I’ll never change mine, we just see the world differently and actually have different values.

On here i see it used as a snide way of saying “you have lower values than me”.

Those don’t sound like put downs. You are finding reasons to be offended.

'i don't like you or your views” - ok fine.

and I'm better than you and my views are the only right ones, but I don't want to sound superior or that I'm putting you down or that I'm up myself'.-
-You are totally up yourself.

Woke people are very liberal as long as you agree with them

This is how it can feel sometimes

But they're not values, hobbies/skills at best, but not values

@WhatIsThisMad

The bit about the apprentice, they were basically saying that your (your company) values are shit - are they?

agreeing to disagree can be used for anything big or small.

values are all big things

I'm not offended. I would prefer people were honest and said - "I think you are wrong and I'm right". That would feel more honest, especially if they backed up their argument. I don't mind people thinking my views are wrong. It's good to have a nice discussion and sometimes I change my views when people point things out. "We have different values" always feels like an implied "mine are better than yours" without it being said, which feels less honest or that something can't be said. I think I have good values, and often not that different to the person saying we have different ones - just that they lead us to different conclusions and perspectives.

Eg. My apprentice was quite a staunch socialist. I am left leaning but slightly less extreme. I liked hearing the views of my apprentice, it made me think and some of her points I felt were really meaningful and good to reflect on and I changed my mind and opinions on a couple of things. That we had different views I thought was good - boring to all think the same. However, I think she implied that our views said something about our core values that maybe wasn't as different as they felt. They made a few comments to imply their views expressed valuing kindness, fairness, caring, compassion. I felt my views also expressed these values but my conclusions were just different to hers. I feel opinions and views are changeable and more surface than values, which we tend to hold more deeply. A criticism of my values just feels more personal than a criticism of my opinions. I don't necessarily want to change my values, which I hold close. Opinions and views however, I am happy to change based on discussion and hearing alternative arguments.