It might be obvious that 1 or 2 could never compete with the others, but they all play an important role.

Which is the most admirable to you? Feel free to rank order them as well

Sanctity
Loyalty
Care
Fairness
Authority
Liberty

- > Responsibility
Liberty
Loyalty
Fairness
Care
Authority
Sanctity

Hey good point. Now I'm piggybacking here, this isn't like an original thought or anything, but I believe the reason personal responsibility isn't on the list, is because it sort of precludes each of the other values in a unique way. When you take personal responsibility, you acknowledge the need to act in accordance with each of the subsequent values. To have responsibility, is to uphold the individual values you see as important.

I voted loyalty. Care, fairness and liberty would be up there as well.

liberty

That's a curious mix. Can I ask why you think we can exist without care for our neighbor, respect for our establishments, or the sanctity of tradition? If we have only liberty, loyalty, and fairness.. it sounds like some kind of tyrannical/communist utopia. We all have a healthy amount of freedom, we all play by the rules, and we all have loyalty to... the authority that governs us and grants said freedom and fairness?

fairness and care. not a fan of liberty at all. think we have too much freedom in the west. chit is double edged sword. homeless or ******* people can do whatever they want. can't even charge homeless for crimes

never snitch

That's loyalty my man. An undervalued trait these days.

Big Booty BBWs

I gotchu bro, I just didn't want to overwhelm the masses with an OP text wall.

1) Care/harm: This foundation is related to our long evolution as mammals with attachment systems and an ability to feel (and dislike) the pain of others. It underlies virtues of kindness, gentleness, and nurturance.

2) Fairness/cheating: This foundation is related to the evolutionary process of reciprocal altruism. It generates ideas of justice, rights, and autonomy.

3) Loyalty/betrayal: This foundation is related to our long history as tribal creatures able to form shifting coalitions. It underlies virtues of patriotism and self-sacrifice for the group. It is active anytime people feel that it’s “one for all, and all for one.”

4) Authority/subversion: This foundation was shaped by our long primate history of hierarchical social interactions. It underlies virtues of leadership and followership, including deference to legitimate authority and respect for traditions.

5) Sanctity/degradation: This foundation was shaped by the psychology of disgust and contamination. It underlies religious notions of striving to live in an elevated, less carnal, more noble way. It underlies the widespread idea that the body is a temple which can be desecrated by immoral activities and contaminants (an idea not unique to religious traditions).

6) Liberty/oppression: This foundation is about the feelings of reactance and resentment people feel toward those who dominate them and restrict their liberty. Its intuitions are often in tension with those of the authority foundation. The hatred of bullies and dominators motivates people to come together, in solidarity, to oppose or take down the oppressor.

Fairness
Care
Loyalty
Liberty
Authority
Sanctity

Ranked like this because freedom when cheating, harm and betrayal is the norm would be unpleasant. Homeless people are "free", yay.

EDIT

I will say that I'd probably need to see side-by-side comparisons of various societies to see which one matters. For example a set up like the US is probably preferably to me than a some super-nice society where everyone has to live in hovels and eat potatoes because they have no money. So if like "wealth" comes from "freedom" then yeah maybe it gets ranked higher.

Loyalty seems like the only one I at all value.

Authority matters to some extent, except I think people do not act cruel with sufficient laws. They do not need to go too far. Liberty matches this.
Sanctity? Who does not value this? Seems meaningless to name.
Care? People naturally care. I do not want responsibility of care to go too far. just enough.
Fairness? This goes along with crime, and authority solves it. People act fair enough naturally in a crime-free culture.

None of the above.

I think care is the root of most of those.

Sanctity means nothing to some people. Typically the far left. If we consider the liberal narrative as a struggle against inequality, exploitation, and irrational traditionalism, in pursuit of autonomy and equality - we understand that the sanctity of things like family values and gender roles is in direct opposition to most liberal fronts.

As far as care goes, libertarians don't give many chits about the public, give me maximum liberty and let the chips fall as they may, right?I believe, similar to personal responsibility above, that honesty is incorporated in various ways between loyalty, authority, fairness.. and probably all of them in different ways.

Where's God lol

Where is the “ass” option?

Sanctity - noun
the state or quality of being holy, sacred, or saintly.

Seems like innately for sanctity to make sense, one ought to be religious. Since religion is basically bs, it stands to reason that anyone with half a brain ought to conclude sanctity is irrelevant.

Care isn't particularly important. I do not care much for people who oppose science.

Fairness can matter, but life is inherently unfair to begin with...

Loyalty is irrelevant. If a reasonable and rational case is made for something, it ought to be taken srsly whether it goes against your sense of loyalty or not.

Authority is irrelevant for the same reason as above.

Liberty is nice until the freedom to be an idiot adversely affects other people.

The most important virtue is a commitment to truth and its pursuit via empirical experiments (science) or reasoned deduction (math).

Loyalty is retarded srs. You don't need to be loyal, because you will want to stick by someone who has good values. Not going to be loyal to someone who is a piece of chit. Absolutely retarded logic.

Wouldn't sticking by someone with good values = loyalty? Isn't that how it would arise naturally? To follow a natural leader than someone who demands your service?

If you read the above descriptions of each, you'll see an explanation for sanctity that is rooted in religion, but is not exclusive to it. Also, without religion, we would not be where we are today, so I'd disagree that religion is BS.

Actually, reading the descriptions might give you a better handle on all the concepts. To be fair, I left lots of room for interpretation in the OP, but I wanted to get a little traction instead of assaulting people with words and concepts.

Well I just don't get how anything can be considered sacred.

Do you lift?

I, and maybe lots of people here, find the gym to be sacred. It's where I meditate, and if there's a God, I find him in there and at the tops of mountains.

Do you not believe that old growth forests are sacred? Do you believe the burning of the Amazon is fine, since there are people to feed afterall?

(in my experience) I'd say 99% of people will find a thousand year old tree to be valuable beyond words. How do you describe the awe of a tree that's hundreds of feet high? Thinking about it weathering a thousand winters and standing stronger than ever. Is that not somehow sacred?

If you're an American, would you not take offence to someone burning our flag? That would indicate sanctity.

There are literally thousands of good examples. Admittedly, they are hard to come up with, but they exist everywhere.

Sacred necessitates a connection to God. Since I don't believe there exists a God and also believe the notion itself is inherently contradictory, I cannot hold anything to be sacred...

Things can be important. Sure. But not sacred.

Give me Liberty or death

Forgive me for using examples containing the idea of god. But you can still understand that the concept just relates to something bigger than we can explain? Whether it be something external like nature, or something internal like peace. The sacredness itself is not a characteristic of something transcendental, it's just a feature of something we hold to be particularly important. I.e. the reverence for your nation (lol a terrible example still... where are people still proud to live?)

edit: actually, more interesting that seeing if you will accept sacredness for me - will you explain how the notion of God is contradictory? I don't know if I've heard that.

It depends on what characteristics you give to God. Omniscience and omnipotence are fallacious concepts.

I guess by an extended definition of "sacred" sans any reference to religion, I would argue truth is sacred.

If we aren't committed to truth, then all dialogue becomes meaningless.

No loyalty means sticking with someone when there are valid reasons you shouldn't. Ignoring valid reasoning = retard.