|
Enneagram Type 5 Board Archive Re: ContextPosted by Laurence on November 21, 2000 at 01:21:27: In Reply to: Context posted by Rotten Apple on November 20, 2000 at 19:53:08: "Manners", or I'd prefer standardised expectations, are derived from a set of collective values, thus the difference is more in terms of external vs internal values, isn't it, to be precise!!! Then, the real choice boils down to choosing what set of outcomes one wishes most for, ehh, that's all so damned logical. But, however, some people seem to erase any cause-effect links between their (could be subconscious, ok) own choices and the problems they may run into. Regarding sex, two things might help:
: I'm glad you still have the patience to respond to me but as you may suppose, I'm not interested in a moral lesson. (Particularly from one who can't even spell out the word "sex" like an embarrassed 12 year old.) But perhaps on the topic of manners, we can set out differences aside for some useful discussion? : I agree that knowing how to use social rules and etiquette is important for a variety of reasons. But in the case of the type 5, I would say those reasons have more to do with handling the other person than with one's personal morality. (Yes, I know how to be perfectly polite in the proper context. That is what makes me a dangerous devil.) : How do you feel about the adaptability of social standards. Do you think one must always adhere to their own set of manners (stick to your guns) or should behavior be altered to suit the environment (when in Rome)? Say you were visiting an island in the South Pacific where the natives considered it offensive to smile in public... would you make a special effort to keep a straight face while in their company? What if it were a Middle Eastern country where propriety requires woman to cover all but hands and eyes... would you adapt without argument? : To sum up... if manners are culturally derived and values internally derived, how do you balance a conflict between them? : RA
|
|