Even at the dawn of the development of philosophy, people thought about what forms the basic value orientations of a person, what their hierarchy is, and how values ​​influence a person’s life attitudes. Paradoxically, these discussions have not subsided to this day. Are our value attitudes inherent or imposed by society as a result of upbringing, in what percentage does a person choose them, and in which - are these value attitudes a product of pressure from society and social mimicry from the individual?
It is no longer necessary to prove that a person has left the animal environment. And therefore, from the animal world, he has many life attitudes that determine his value orientations: this is, first of all, the preservation of life, as well as the continuation of the genus. Since man descended from primates living in the herd, we also have a value-driven desire for power, which can be expressed in various forms - from sadistic tendencies to humiliate others, to passionarity. And if we are talking about alpha, beta and gamma individuals in the animal kingdom, then why not be honest with us and not assume that the same mechanisms drive the representatives of the biological species homo sapiens? In the same way, we are driven by the instinct of procreation, which indirectly determines our aesthetic values ​​(whom we consider attractive for sexual partnership), economic (the accumulation of vital benefits for passing them to descendants), political (the desire to streamline life as opposed to chaos and anarchy) and so on .
However, a person is a “zoon politikon”, a social animal, and therefore society imposes its values ​​and value orientations on an individual. This can be seen, if only from the fact that as in society there are certain classes and strata, so are the values ​​of representatives of these classes and strata. We can talk about the value orientations of hippies and yuppies, the values ​​of peasants and workers, deeply religious people and atheists. The formation of value attitudes is also influenced by the “mass unconscious” - that paradigm in which a person was brought up from childhood.
How are our relatively stable relations to material and spiritual goods, values, ideals formed, which, in turn, serve as our guide in life and guide our behavior? Their education is influenced by society as a whole, the environment, upbringing and personal experience of a person. Many value orientations are formed by the collective unconscious, prevailing in society atuit. Growing up, the child quickly enough begins to distinguish the values ​​declared in society from those professed by the majority of the population. So, the 70s of the last century, the times of the domination of "developed socialism", the youth called "doublethink." Each society has its own set of values ​​with which it carries individuals. It would seem that all people should have similar values ​​in life: success, wealth, beauty, happiness. As for the attitude to material wealth, value orientations can be “earn and buy,” or they can be “steal and drink.” After all, what is “success in life”: to realize oneself or to buy a monetary position and do nothing? What is "wealth": personal comfort or throwing dust in the eyes? What is “beautiful”: style or expensive kitsch?
How sustainable are value orientations? Despite the fact that they move us in a behavioral plane, they change with age. But, nevertheless, we are all guided by the desire for good. Only now, "good" is understood by us differently. Good - is it good and beneficial for us (albeit to the evil of others), or is it beneficial to others, albeit by self-sacrifice? No wonder religious people ask the question: where does the concept of “good” come from, if not from the One who makes us people, encouraging us to strive for good and do good “just like that”.