Alexander Hill claims that possessing "ultimate values" is crucial because you need a set of values that take precedence over all others. As a result, you are aware of which values to rely on when there are conflicting ones. 

 

He specifically contends that justice, love, and holiness are the best fundamental values:

Pursuing "holiness" (also known as action purity) will help us develop personal virtue and become more "pure" in our actions. 

By pursuing "justice," we will aim to treat people fairly and see that others are treated fairly in our world. 

By seeking "love," we'll aim to love people with empathy, cognizance, and hope.

We may avoid relying too heavily on one area by attempting to balance all three of them at once, allowing us to maintain a balanced point of view. For instance: 

 

 

Our thoughts and deeds may be reasonable and fair if we concentrate on justice without regard for holiness or purity, but they may also be distorted by utilitarianism, which sacrifices the rights and needs of the minority in favor of the majority's conception of "good."

 

Hill contends that these three principles need to be the three legs of a single stool that act as the foundation for our choices, our viewpoints, and our way of life. 

 

1 Do you concur that these three represent the highest values? If not, why not? 

2 Do you think there are any other ideals that come first? If so, describe them and explain why you think they should be considered among the "ultimate" values. 

3 Why do you think all other values are included in your list of fundamental values?

4  How do you think upholding these fundamental principles as a leader might assist you in exercising intelligent and moral leadership in the workplace?