Have you ever wanted to stand up for something you believe in,
but doing so would counter something else you believe in,
as well as cost you some things you value/treasure.
How would you decide what to do?
Conflicting Standards
Have you ever wanted to stand up for something you believe in,
but doing so would counter something else you believe in,
as well as cost you some things you value/treasure.
How would you decide what to do?
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Actually, no, never?
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Lucky bastard.Originally Posted by FDG
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Dunno if it's Ti polr exactly.
Normally when I'm having to decide between two things, i will "decide" on one, and see how that feels. Then "decide" on the other, and see how That felt. Or figure out what's being lost with either approach, and see which loss I can live with. This time my normal methods are failing, probably because of the emotional turmoil involved. Grrr.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
That's a cognitive dissonance and probably a very common situation. The only way to solve this problem is to either bite the bullet and choose one alternative regardless of the negative consequences or to find a third alternative which avoids the whole problem of contradicting beliefs.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Peoples first moral should be to have standards for how they apply their ethics. Otherwise they are just salesmen and hypocrites.
If i really have no stronger preference for either of the two conflicting things i'll flip a coin.
That link was great, thanks. It clarified one of the issues I'm dealing with...that of feeling like either choice requires me to justify something. Which I'm also not comfortable with.
This is good, I guess, in that I'm forcing myself to make a more conscious decision about what to do, rather than following the initial impulses.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
most consistency is illusory, especially in matters of morality.
I think it's Ne, in cases like this. It can make for some paradoxical surface appearances. It plus feelings can make for a pickle, but perhaps it can solve the dilemma, too. (Thus the most helpful input tends to come from other Ne-egos who have run into similar situations.)
In non-socionics, one approach could be "integrative thinking."
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
I am probably slow to change my mind on things I feel comfortable about, and have a less decisive stance about matters I am less certain of. If I do change my view or if I'm in the process of reconsidering my view, I might soften my position when dealing with external matters but still hold my previous view privately. (If asked, then perhaps I will tell you all this, although in some cases, it may depend on much I trust you).
Re-reading the op, it doesn't sound like you are asking about conflicting standards; Rather: Conflicting Ethics. Standards being 'how' and ethics being 'what'.
You decide which you value more in the context. It's how you form Ethics from standards. Often times Acting on one morals(Ethics) causes one to subvert another moral also held with regard.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
Perhaps.
I used standards in terms of a rule that I have regarding how to behave in a particular context. (for me, not for others)
Standing up for something at significant cost, for me, requires something pretty strong to drive me to risk losing something I value because I've felt a line of standards has finally been crossed.
But I'm not interested in getting hung up on the term used in the title. I figure the OP clarified what I was asking about.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
the only time i remember this being a problem is when it comes to a principle i hold versus the behavior of a real live person that i like. i think i'm more likely to compromise in favor of remaining on good terms with the actual person, but it depends.
there is something vaguely familiar and relatable about @Subteigh's post, but i can't apply it to any actual examples.
I probably have experienced such things. E.g. a conflict between a need for loyalty to a person I appreciated and something I believed in myself that was contradicted by what they did or wanted. I don't have easy ways out of such situations, usually I try to understand where the person is coming from and what their real motivations are, take time away to process everything and, if necessary, explain why I cannot support them.
Other more serious conflicts of standards.... well, I actually gave up on a job I used to like (content-wise) because I simultaneously had a superior whose values were very incompatible with mine. I was expected to turn into some sort of private spy apart from doing my own job. How I decided what to do? I realized it would be very hard to stay there while becoming that person's enemy due to non-compliance and that I had to sacrifice something. After a while I got over it.
i experience small conflicts of this kind all the time, feeling torn between two people or two places or events I'd like to support each entailing certain investments and compromises. i resolve them by taking care to prioritize and figure out what is most important in the long run and where my efforts would be more effective and not be wasted in vain.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote