Why The Rose Matters: On Personal Irreplaceable Value

Andrea Villalba Cuesta

UT Austin 

Joseph Raz opens “”Value, Respect, and Attachment”” with an anecdote from Antoine de Saint-Exupéry’s “”The Little Prince.”” The Little Prince, having arrived on Earth from the tiny asteroid B-612—his only companion being a rose—discovers a garden filled with five thousand roses. Overwhelmed, he proclaims through tears: “”I thought that I was rich, with a flower than was unique in all the world; and all I had was a common rose… That doesn’t make me a very great prince.”” Ultimately, an encounter with a fox resolves the boy’s crisis. Raz sums up the fox’s lesson nicely: while the rose may not be perceptually unique, it is “”made unique by the history of their love.”” The rose is irreplaceable for the Little Prince because it is his rose; it is irreplaceably valuable.

You might be wondering: What kind of irreplaceable value is Raz referring to? Those familiar with the value theory literature on irreplaceability, particularly Gwen Bradford’s recent work, will recognize that the irreplaceable value at stake here differs from that associated with objects like Stradivarius violins. The rose’s irreplaceable value is of the personal variety: it gives only the Little Prince reasons to admire, cherish, and preserve it. Impersonal irreplaceable value, by contrast, gives everyone reasons. This paper explores the distinction between these two kinds of irreplaceable value. More specifically, I argue against Bradford’s suggestion that “perhaps the difference is ultimately one of amount of value.” To do so, I develop a novel account of personal irreplaceable value—or more precisely, a kind of irreplaceable good-for— drawing on Monique Wonderly’s work on security-based attachments. I argue that the rose is irreplaceably good-for the Little Prince insofar as it provides felt security. The Little Prince needs the rose—and here, unlike in cases of impersonal irreplaceable value, we are in the domain of prudence. The difference between personal and impersonal irreplaceable value is a difference in kind, not merely in degree.

Chair: Sanjar Akayev

Time: 03 September, 16:00 – 16:30

Location: SR 1.004


Posted

in

by